Metaphor, figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions Stefano Arduini.
136
Metaphor, figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions Stefano Arduini
-
Upload
osborne-horn -
Category
Documents
-
view
261 -
download
4
Transcript of Metaphor, figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions Stefano Arduini.
Metaphor figurative language and translation
Some Essential QuestionsStefano Arduini
Introduction new directions and essential questions
bull Over the last twenty five years some radical rethinking has taken place in linguistics particularly on some of the basic principles in which linguistics research since the 1950s has been grounded
Why is generative grammar no longer useful
How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and
cognition
Generative Grammar
bull Language is a biological phenomenon
bull Innate universals
bull Specific parameters for specific languages
bull Modular view of language
In contrast with GG
bull Language is view form the point of view of meaning
bull Meaning is not isolated from other aspects of cognition
bull Language is not attributed to innate potentiality but derives from interaction and context of use
bull Therefore the language faculty cannot be separated from other kinds of cognitive resources
bull Language is the result of a wide range of cognitive resources
Meaning is a central aspect
bull It is not separate from syntax
bull Lakoff most important aspects of syntax depend on thought since the main function of language is that of expressing thoughts
bull Langacker syntax is a formal system whose purpose is to give shape to meanings
bull Grammar acquires meaning
bull Grammatical units make up a continuum with lexis setting un various levels of abstraction
How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for
understanding figurative language
Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does
it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
Interesting research routes
bull Figurative language is not only a formal (syntactic) means but the manifestation of more deeply rooted more general cognitive competence
bull Figurative activity is the ability to construct world images employed in reality
Figures are cognitive processes
bull Anthropological processes because they concern a specifically human characteristic
bull Expressive processes because they refer to the means by which human beings organize their communicative faculties
bull These cognitive processes are not restricted to verbal expression (imaginative faculty myth unconscious domains linked with expressive behavior)
How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions
in research and thinking about language
Roots in the past
bull Nietzsche Darstellung der antike Rhetorik (communication is intrinsically metaphorical because a metaphorical process underpins the formation on concepts)
bull Giambattista Vico De Constantia Philologiae (figures give rise to knowledge we can see the cognitive approach as leading a return to Vico)
How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
Juri Lotman
bull Metaphor and metonymy belong to the field of analogical thought This is why they are organically linked with creative consciousness as such In this sense it is a mistake to contrast rhetorical thought inasmuch as it is specifically artistic with scientific thought Rhetoric is intrinsic to scientific consciousness in the same way as it is to artistic consciousness[1]
bull[1] Juri M Lotman ldquoRetoricardquo in Enciclopedia vol XI Torino Einaudi p 1056
Juri Lotman
bull the trope is not an ornament which only belongs to the sphere of expression It is not decoration of invariant content but rather the mechanism for constructing content which cannot be controlled within a single language The trope is a figure that comes into being at the joining point of two languages and in this sense is isostructural to the creative consciousness mechanism as such[1]
bull[1] Ib p 1055
How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory
and practice of translation
In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
bull From my point of view the new cognitivist approaches as the perspectives of textual rhetoric can offer new possibilities to the broad area of studies on translation above all in the direction to go beyond some of the limits of the discipline
J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
Two main branches of discipline1 DESCRIPTIVE part (concerning concrete
translational phenomena) and THEORETICAL part (establishing general principles to explain and predict translational phenomena)
2 APPLIED BRANCH (translator training translation criticism and translation aids)
TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
bull The theoretical aspect was greatly dependent on the descriptive one
bull In contrast with most 20th century epistemology description of facts are influenced by code and described in the light of a specific socio-semiotic system
Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century
newer developments in semantics
How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile
mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of
translation
bull the importance of the role of figurative speech in the new rhetoric is as important to translation as was the explosion of semantics in the cognitive studies and the idea that metaphors structure our world perception
bull Such an appreciation of figurative speech can permit us to go beyond these limits and encourage a possible rethinking of translation studies founded on a wider consideration of the kind of facts which are connected with translation
bull Concept like RHETORICAL FIELD DOMAIN FRAME PROFILE MENTAL SPACE SIMILARITY can be very productive
Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to
another
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Introduction new directions and essential questions
bull Over the last twenty five years some radical rethinking has taken place in linguistics particularly on some of the basic principles in which linguistics research since the 1950s has been grounded
Why is generative grammar no longer useful
How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and
cognition
Generative Grammar
bull Language is a biological phenomenon
bull Innate universals
bull Specific parameters for specific languages
bull Modular view of language
In contrast with GG
bull Language is view form the point of view of meaning
bull Meaning is not isolated from other aspects of cognition
bull Language is not attributed to innate potentiality but derives from interaction and context of use
bull Therefore the language faculty cannot be separated from other kinds of cognitive resources
bull Language is the result of a wide range of cognitive resources
Meaning is a central aspect
bull It is not separate from syntax
bull Lakoff most important aspects of syntax depend on thought since the main function of language is that of expressing thoughts
bull Langacker syntax is a formal system whose purpose is to give shape to meanings
bull Grammar acquires meaning
bull Grammatical units make up a continuum with lexis setting un various levels of abstraction
How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for
understanding figurative language
Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does
it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
Interesting research routes
bull Figurative language is not only a formal (syntactic) means but the manifestation of more deeply rooted more general cognitive competence
bull Figurative activity is the ability to construct world images employed in reality
Figures are cognitive processes
bull Anthropological processes because they concern a specifically human characteristic
bull Expressive processes because they refer to the means by which human beings organize their communicative faculties
bull These cognitive processes are not restricted to verbal expression (imaginative faculty myth unconscious domains linked with expressive behavior)
How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions
in research and thinking about language
Roots in the past
bull Nietzsche Darstellung der antike Rhetorik (communication is intrinsically metaphorical because a metaphorical process underpins the formation on concepts)
bull Giambattista Vico De Constantia Philologiae (figures give rise to knowledge we can see the cognitive approach as leading a return to Vico)
How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
Juri Lotman
bull Metaphor and metonymy belong to the field of analogical thought This is why they are organically linked with creative consciousness as such In this sense it is a mistake to contrast rhetorical thought inasmuch as it is specifically artistic with scientific thought Rhetoric is intrinsic to scientific consciousness in the same way as it is to artistic consciousness[1]
bull[1] Juri M Lotman ldquoRetoricardquo in Enciclopedia vol XI Torino Einaudi p 1056
Juri Lotman
bull the trope is not an ornament which only belongs to the sphere of expression It is not decoration of invariant content but rather the mechanism for constructing content which cannot be controlled within a single language The trope is a figure that comes into being at the joining point of two languages and in this sense is isostructural to the creative consciousness mechanism as such[1]
bull[1] Ib p 1055
How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory
and practice of translation
In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
bull From my point of view the new cognitivist approaches as the perspectives of textual rhetoric can offer new possibilities to the broad area of studies on translation above all in the direction to go beyond some of the limits of the discipline
J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
Two main branches of discipline1 DESCRIPTIVE part (concerning concrete
translational phenomena) and THEORETICAL part (establishing general principles to explain and predict translational phenomena)
2 APPLIED BRANCH (translator training translation criticism and translation aids)
TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
bull The theoretical aspect was greatly dependent on the descriptive one
bull In contrast with most 20th century epistemology description of facts are influenced by code and described in the light of a specific socio-semiotic system
Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century
newer developments in semantics
How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile
mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of
translation
bull the importance of the role of figurative speech in the new rhetoric is as important to translation as was the explosion of semantics in the cognitive studies and the idea that metaphors structure our world perception
bull Such an appreciation of figurative speech can permit us to go beyond these limits and encourage a possible rethinking of translation studies founded on a wider consideration of the kind of facts which are connected with translation
bull Concept like RHETORICAL FIELD DOMAIN FRAME PROFILE MENTAL SPACE SIMILARITY can be very productive
Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to
another
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Why is generative grammar no longer useful
How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and
cognition
Generative Grammar
bull Language is a biological phenomenon
bull Innate universals
bull Specific parameters for specific languages
bull Modular view of language
In contrast with GG
bull Language is view form the point of view of meaning
bull Meaning is not isolated from other aspects of cognition
bull Language is not attributed to innate potentiality but derives from interaction and context of use
bull Therefore the language faculty cannot be separated from other kinds of cognitive resources
bull Language is the result of a wide range of cognitive resources
Meaning is a central aspect
bull It is not separate from syntax
bull Lakoff most important aspects of syntax depend on thought since the main function of language is that of expressing thoughts
bull Langacker syntax is a formal system whose purpose is to give shape to meanings
bull Grammar acquires meaning
bull Grammatical units make up a continuum with lexis setting un various levels of abstraction
How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for
understanding figurative language
Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does
it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
Interesting research routes
bull Figurative language is not only a formal (syntactic) means but the manifestation of more deeply rooted more general cognitive competence
bull Figurative activity is the ability to construct world images employed in reality
Figures are cognitive processes
bull Anthropological processes because they concern a specifically human characteristic
bull Expressive processes because they refer to the means by which human beings organize their communicative faculties
bull These cognitive processes are not restricted to verbal expression (imaginative faculty myth unconscious domains linked with expressive behavior)
How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions
in research and thinking about language
Roots in the past
bull Nietzsche Darstellung der antike Rhetorik (communication is intrinsically metaphorical because a metaphorical process underpins the formation on concepts)
bull Giambattista Vico De Constantia Philologiae (figures give rise to knowledge we can see the cognitive approach as leading a return to Vico)
How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
Juri Lotman
bull Metaphor and metonymy belong to the field of analogical thought This is why they are organically linked with creative consciousness as such In this sense it is a mistake to contrast rhetorical thought inasmuch as it is specifically artistic with scientific thought Rhetoric is intrinsic to scientific consciousness in the same way as it is to artistic consciousness[1]
bull[1] Juri M Lotman ldquoRetoricardquo in Enciclopedia vol XI Torino Einaudi p 1056
Juri Lotman
bull the trope is not an ornament which only belongs to the sphere of expression It is not decoration of invariant content but rather the mechanism for constructing content which cannot be controlled within a single language The trope is a figure that comes into being at the joining point of two languages and in this sense is isostructural to the creative consciousness mechanism as such[1]
bull[1] Ib p 1055
How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory
and practice of translation
In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
bull From my point of view the new cognitivist approaches as the perspectives of textual rhetoric can offer new possibilities to the broad area of studies on translation above all in the direction to go beyond some of the limits of the discipline
J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
Two main branches of discipline1 DESCRIPTIVE part (concerning concrete
translational phenomena) and THEORETICAL part (establishing general principles to explain and predict translational phenomena)
2 APPLIED BRANCH (translator training translation criticism and translation aids)
TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
bull The theoretical aspect was greatly dependent on the descriptive one
bull In contrast with most 20th century epistemology description of facts are influenced by code and described in the light of a specific socio-semiotic system
Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century
newer developments in semantics
How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile
mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of
translation
bull the importance of the role of figurative speech in the new rhetoric is as important to translation as was the explosion of semantics in the cognitive studies and the idea that metaphors structure our world perception
bull Such an appreciation of figurative speech can permit us to go beyond these limits and encourage a possible rethinking of translation studies founded on a wider consideration of the kind of facts which are connected with translation
bull Concept like RHETORICAL FIELD DOMAIN FRAME PROFILE MENTAL SPACE SIMILARITY can be very productive
Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to
another
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and
cognition
Generative Grammar
bull Language is a biological phenomenon
bull Innate universals
bull Specific parameters for specific languages
bull Modular view of language
In contrast with GG
bull Language is view form the point of view of meaning
bull Meaning is not isolated from other aspects of cognition
bull Language is not attributed to innate potentiality but derives from interaction and context of use
bull Therefore the language faculty cannot be separated from other kinds of cognitive resources
bull Language is the result of a wide range of cognitive resources
Meaning is a central aspect
bull It is not separate from syntax
bull Lakoff most important aspects of syntax depend on thought since the main function of language is that of expressing thoughts
bull Langacker syntax is a formal system whose purpose is to give shape to meanings
bull Grammar acquires meaning
bull Grammatical units make up a continuum with lexis setting un various levels of abstraction
How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for
understanding figurative language
Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does
it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
Interesting research routes
bull Figurative language is not only a formal (syntactic) means but the manifestation of more deeply rooted more general cognitive competence
bull Figurative activity is the ability to construct world images employed in reality
Figures are cognitive processes
bull Anthropological processes because they concern a specifically human characteristic
bull Expressive processes because they refer to the means by which human beings organize their communicative faculties
bull These cognitive processes are not restricted to verbal expression (imaginative faculty myth unconscious domains linked with expressive behavior)
How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions
in research and thinking about language
Roots in the past
bull Nietzsche Darstellung der antike Rhetorik (communication is intrinsically metaphorical because a metaphorical process underpins the formation on concepts)
bull Giambattista Vico De Constantia Philologiae (figures give rise to knowledge we can see the cognitive approach as leading a return to Vico)
How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
Juri Lotman
bull Metaphor and metonymy belong to the field of analogical thought This is why they are organically linked with creative consciousness as such In this sense it is a mistake to contrast rhetorical thought inasmuch as it is specifically artistic with scientific thought Rhetoric is intrinsic to scientific consciousness in the same way as it is to artistic consciousness[1]
bull[1] Juri M Lotman ldquoRetoricardquo in Enciclopedia vol XI Torino Einaudi p 1056
Juri Lotman
bull the trope is not an ornament which only belongs to the sphere of expression It is not decoration of invariant content but rather the mechanism for constructing content which cannot be controlled within a single language The trope is a figure that comes into being at the joining point of two languages and in this sense is isostructural to the creative consciousness mechanism as such[1]
bull[1] Ib p 1055
How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory
and practice of translation
In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
bull From my point of view the new cognitivist approaches as the perspectives of textual rhetoric can offer new possibilities to the broad area of studies on translation above all in the direction to go beyond some of the limits of the discipline
J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
Two main branches of discipline1 DESCRIPTIVE part (concerning concrete
translational phenomena) and THEORETICAL part (establishing general principles to explain and predict translational phenomena)
2 APPLIED BRANCH (translator training translation criticism and translation aids)
TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
bull The theoretical aspect was greatly dependent on the descriptive one
bull In contrast with most 20th century epistemology description of facts are influenced by code and described in the light of a specific socio-semiotic system
Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century
newer developments in semantics
How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile
mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of
translation
bull the importance of the role of figurative speech in the new rhetoric is as important to translation as was the explosion of semantics in the cognitive studies and the idea that metaphors structure our world perception
bull Such an appreciation of figurative speech can permit us to go beyond these limits and encourage a possible rethinking of translation studies founded on a wider consideration of the kind of facts which are connected with translation
bull Concept like RHETORICAL FIELD DOMAIN FRAME PROFILE MENTAL SPACE SIMILARITY can be very productive
Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to
another
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Generative Grammar
bull Language is a biological phenomenon
bull Innate universals
bull Specific parameters for specific languages
bull Modular view of language
In contrast with GG
bull Language is view form the point of view of meaning
bull Meaning is not isolated from other aspects of cognition
bull Language is not attributed to innate potentiality but derives from interaction and context of use
bull Therefore the language faculty cannot be separated from other kinds of cognitive resources
bull Language is the result of a wide range of cognitive resources
Meaning is a central aspect
bull It is not separate from syntax
bull Lakoff most important aspects of syntax depend on thought since the main function of language is that of expressing thoughts
bull Langacker syntax is a formal system whose purpose is to give shape to meanings
bull Grammar acquires meaning
bull Grammatical units make up a continuum with lexis setting un various levels of abstraction
How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for
understanding figurative language
Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does
it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
Interesting research routes
bull Figurative language is not only a formal (syntactic) means but the manifestation of more deeply rooted more general cognitive competence
bull Figurative activity is the ability to construct world images employed in reality
Figures are cognitive processes
bull Anthropological processes because they concern a specifically human characteristic
bull Expressive processes because they refer to the means by which human beings organize their communicative faculties
bull These cognitive processes are not restricted to verbal expression (imaginative faculty myth unconscious domains linked with expressive behavior)
How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions
in research and thinking about language
Roots in the past
bull Nietzsche Darstellung der antike Rhetorik (communication is intrinsically metaphorical because a metaphorical process underpins the formation on concepts)
bull Giambattista Vico De Constantia Philologiae (figures give rise to knowledge we can see the cognitive approach as leading a return to Vico)
How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
Juri Lotman
bull Metaphor and metonymy belong to the field of analogical thought This is why they are organically linked with creative consciousness as such In this sense it is a mistake to contrast rhetorical thought inasmuch as it is specifically artistic with scientific thought Rhetoric is intrinsic to scientific consciousness in the same way as it is to artistic consciousness[1]
bull[1] Juri M Lotman ldquoRetoricardquo in Enciclopedia vol XI Torino Einaudi p 1056
Juri Lotman
bull the trope is not an ornament which only belongs to the sphere of expression It is not decoration of invariant content but rather the mechanism for constructing content which cannot be controlled within a single language The trope is a figure that comes into being at the joining point of two languages and in this sense is isostructural to the creative consciousness mechanism as such[1]
bull[1] Ib p 1055
How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory
and practice of translation
In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
bull From my point of view the new cognitivist approaches as the perspectives of textual rhetoric can offer new possibilities to the broad area of studies on translation above all in the direction to go beyond some of the limits of the discipline
J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
Two main branches of discipline1 DESCRIPTIVE part (concerning concrete
translational phenomena) and THEORETICAL part (establishing general principles to explain and predict translational phenomena)
2 APPLIED BRANCH (translator training translation criticism and translation aids)
TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
bull The theoretical aspect was greatly dependent on the descriptive one
bull In contrast with most 20th century epistemology description of facts are influenced by code and described in the light of a specific socio-semiotic system
Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century
newer developments in semantics
How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile
mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of
translation
bull the importance of the role of figurative speech in the new rhetoric is as important to translation as was the explosion of semantics in the cognitive studies and the idea that metaphors structure our world perception
bull Such an appreciation of figurative speech can permit us to go beyond these limits and encourage a possible rethinking of translation studies founded on a wider consideration of the kind of facts which are connected with translation
bull Concept like RHETORICAL FIELD DOMAIN FRAME PROFILE MENTAL SPACE SIMILARITY can be very productive
Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to
another
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
In contrast with GG
bull Language is view form the point of view of meaning
bull Meaning is not isolated from other aspects of cognition
bull Language is not attributed to innate potentiality but derives from interaction and context of use
bull Therefore the language faculty cannot be separated from other kinds of cognitive resources
bull Language is the result of a wide range of cognitive resources
Meaning is a central aspect
bull It is not separate from syntax
bull Lakoff most important aspects of syntax depend on thought since the main function of language is that of expressing thoughts
bull Langacker syntax is a formal system whose purpose is to give shape to meanings
bull Grammar acquires meaning
bull Grammatical units make up a continuum with lexis setting un various levels of abstraction
How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for
understanding figurative language
Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does
it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
Interesting research routes
bull Figurative language is not only a formal (syntactic) means but the manifestation of more deeply rooted more general cognitive competence
bull Figurative activity is the ability to construct world images employed in reality
Figures are cognitive processes
bull Anthropological processes because they concern a specifically human characteristic
bull Expressive processes because they refer to the means by which human beings organize their communicative faculties
bull These cognitive processes are not restricted to verbal expression (imaginative faculty myth unconscious domains linked with expressive behavior)
How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions
in research and thinking about language
Roots in the past
bull Nietzsche Darstellung der antike Rhetorik (communication is intrinsically metaphorical because a metaphorical process underpins the formation on concepts)
bull Giambattista Vico De Constantia Philologiae (figures give rise to knowledge we can see the cognitive approach as leading a return to Vico)
How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
Juri Lotman
bull Metaphor and metonymy belong to the field of analogical thought This is why they are organically linked with creative consciousness as such In this sense it is a mistake to contrast rhetorical thought inasmuch as it is specifically artistic with scientific thought Rhetoric is intrinsic to scientific consciousness in the same way as it is to artistic consciousness[1]
bull[1] Juri M Lotman ldquoRetoricardquo in Enciclopedia vol XI Torino Einaudi p 1056
Juri Lotman
bull the trope is not an ornament which only belongs to the sphere of expression It is not decoration of invariant content but rather the mechanism for constructing content which cannot be controlled within a single language The trope is a figure that comes into being at the joining point of two languages and in this sense is isostructural to the creative consciousness mechanism as such[1]
bull[1] Ib p 1055
How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory
and practice of translation
In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
bull From my point of view the new cognitivist approaches as the perspectives of textual rhetoric can offer new possibilities to the broad area of studies on translation above all in the direction to go beyond some of the limits of the discipline
J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
Two main branches of discipline1 DESCRIPTIVE part (concerning concrete
translational phenomena) and THEORETICAL part (establishing general principles to explain and predict translational phenomena)
2 APPLIED BRANCH (translator training translation criticism and translation aids)
TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
bull The theoretical aspect was greatly dependent on the descriptive one
bull In contrast with most 20th century epistemology description of facts are influenced by code and described in the light of a specific socio-semiotic system
Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century
newer developments in semantics
How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile
mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of
translation
bull the importance of the role of figurative speech in the new rhetoric is as important to translation as was the explosion of semantics in the cognitive studies and the idea that metaphors structure our world perception
bull Such an appreciation of figurative speech can permit us to go beyond these limits and encourage a possible rethinking of translation studies founded on a wider consideration of the kind of facts which are connected with translation
bull Concept like RHETORICAL FIELD DOMAIN FRAME PROFILE MENTAL SPACE SIMILARITY can be very productive
Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to
another
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
bull Therefore the language faculty cannot be separated from other kinds of cognitive resources
bull Language is the result of a wide range of cognitive resources
Meaning is a central aspect
bull It is not separate from syntax
bull Lakoff most important aspects of syntax depend on thought since the main function of language is that of expressing thoughts
bull Langacker syntax is a formal system whose purpose is to give shape to meanings
bull Grammar acquires meaning
bull Grammatical units make up a continuum with lexis setting un various levels of abstraction
How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for
understanding figurative language
Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does
it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
Interesting research routes
bull Figurative language is not only a formal (syntactic) means but the manifestation of more deeply rooted more general cognitive competence
bull Figurative activity is the ability to construct world images employed in reality
Figures are cognitive processes
bull Anthropological processes because they concern a specifically human characteristic
bull Expressive processes because they refer to the means by which human beings organize their communicative faculties
bull These cognitive processes are not restricted to verbal expression (imaginative faculty myth unconscious domains linked with expressive behavior)
How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions
in research and thinking about language
Roots in the past
bull Nietzsche Darstellung der antike Rhetorik (communication is intrinsically metaphorical because a metaphorical process underpins the formation on concepts)
bull Giambattista Vico De Constantia Philologiae (figures give rise to knowledge we can see the cognitive approach as leading a return to Vico)
How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
Juri Lotman
bull Metaphor and metonymy belong to the field of analogical thought This is why they are organically linked with creative consciousness as such In this sense it is a mistake to contrast rhetorical thought inasmuch as it is specifically artistic with scientific thought Rhetoric is intrinsic to scientific consciousness in the same way as it is to artistic consciousness[1]
bull[1] Juri M Lotman ldquoRetoricardquo in Enciclopedia vol XI Torino Einaudi p 1056
Juri Lotman
bull the trope is not an ornament which only belongs to the sphere of expression It is not decoration of invariant content but rather the mechanism for constructing content which cannot be controlled within a single language The trope is a figure that comes into being at the joining point of two languages and in this sense is isostructural to the creative consciousness mechanism as such[1]
bull[1] Ib p 1055
How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory
and practice of translation
In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
bull From my point of view the new cognitivist approaches as the perspectives of textual rhetoric can offer new possibilities to the broad area of studies on translation above all in the direction to go beyond some of the limits of the discipline
J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
Two main branches of discipline1 DESCRIPTIVE part (concerning concrete
translational phenomena) and THEORETICAL part (establishing general principles to explain and predict translational phenomena)
2 APPLIED BRANCH (translator training translation criticism and translation aids)
TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
bull The theoretical aspect was greatly dependent on the descriptive one
bull In contrast with most 20th century epistemology description of facts are influenced by code and described in the light of a specific socio-semiotic system
Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century
newer developments in semantics
How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile
mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of
translation
bull the importance of the role of figurative speech in the new rhetoric is as important to translation as was the explosion of semantics in the cognitive studies and the idea that metaphors structure our world perception
bull Such an appreciation of figurative speech can permit us to go beyond these limits and encourage a possible rethinking of translation studies founded on a wider consideration of the kind of facts which are connected with translation
bull Concept like RHETORICAL FIELD DOMAIN FRAME PROFILE MENTAL SPACE SIMILARITY can be very productive
Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to
another
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Meaning is a central aspect
bull It is not separate from syntax
bull Lakoff most important aspects of syntax depend on thought since the main function of language is that of expressing thoughts
bull Langacker syntax is a formal system whose purpose is to give shape to meanings
bull Grammar acquires meaning
bull Grammatical units make up a continuum with lexis setting un various levels of abstraction
How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for
understanding figurative language
Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does
it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
Interesting research routes
bull Figurative language is not only a formal (syntactic) means but the manifestation of more deeply rooted more general cognitive competence
bull Figurative activity is the ability to construct world images employed in reality
Figures are cognitive processes
bull Anthropological processes because they concern a specifically human characteristic
bull Expressive processes because they refer to the means by which human beings organize their communicative faculties
bull These cognitive processes are not restricted to verbal expression (imaginative faculty myth unconscious domains linked with expressive behavior)
How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions
in research and thinking about language
Roots in the past
bull Nietzsche Darstellung der antike Rhetorik (communication is intrinsically metaphorical because a metaphorical process underpins the formation on concepts)
bull Giambattista Vico De Constantia Philologiae (figures give rise to knowledge we can see the cognitive approach as leading a return to Vico)
How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
Juri Lotman
bull Metaphor and metonymy belong to the field of analogical thought This is why they are organically linked with creative consciousness as such In this sense it is a mistake to contrast rhetorical thought inasmuch as it is specifically artistic with scientific thought Rhetoric is intrinsic to scientific consciousness in the same way as it is to artistic consciousness[1]
bull[1] Juri M Lotman ldquoRetoricardquo in Enciclopedia vol XI Torino Einaudi p 1056
Juri Lotman
bull the trope is not an ornament which only belongs to the sphere of expression It is not decoration of invariant content but rather the mechanism for constructing content which cannot be controlled within a single language The trope is a figure that comes into being at the joining point of two languages and in this sense is isostructural to the creative consciousness mechanism as such[1]
bull[1] Ib p 1055
How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory
and practice of translation
In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
bull From my point of view the new cognitivist approaches as the perspectives of textual rhetoric can offer new possibilities to the broad area of studies on translation above all in the direction to go beyond some of the limits of the discipline
J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
Two main branches of discipline1 DESCRIPTIVE part (concerning concrete
translational phenomena) and THEORETICAL part (establishing general principles to explain and predict translational phenomena)
2 APPLIED BRANCH (translator training translation criticism and translation aids)
TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
bull The theoretical aspect was greatly dependent on the descriptive one
bull In contrast with most 20th century epistemology description of facts are influenced by code and described in the light of a specific socio-semiotic system
Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century
newer developments in semantics
How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile
mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of
translation
bull the importance of the role of figurative speech in the new rhetoric is as important to translation as was the explosion of semantics in the cognitive studies and the idea that metaphors structure our world perception
bull Such an appreciation of figurative speech can permit us to go beyond these limits and encourage a possible rethinking of translation studies founded on a wider consideration of the kind of facts which are connected with translation
bull Concept like RHETORICAL FIELD DOMAIN FRAME PROFILE MENTAL SPACE SIMILARITY can be very productive
Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to
another
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
bull Grammar acquires meaning
bull Grammatical units make up a continuum with lexis setting un various levels of abstraction
How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for
understanding figurative language
Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does
it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
Interesting research routes
bull Figurative language is not only a formal (syntactic) means but the manifestation of more deeply rooted more general cognitive competence
bull Figurative activity is the ability to construct world images employed in reality
Figures are cognitive processes
bull Anthropological processes because they concern a specifically human characteristic
bull Expressive processes because they refer to the means by which human beings organize their communicative faculties
bull These cognitive processes are not restricted to verbal expression (imaginative faculty myth unconscious domains linked with expressive behavior)
How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions
in research and thinking about language
Roots in the past
bull Nietzsche Darstellung der antike Rhetorik (communication is intrinsically metaphorical because a metaphorical process underpins the formation on concepts)
bull Giambattista Vico De Constantia Philologiae (figures give rise to knowledge we can see the cognitive approach as leading a return to Vico)
How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
Juri Lotman
bull Metaphor and metonymy belong to the field of analogical thought This is why they are organically linked with creative consciousness as such In this sense it is a mistake to contrast rhetorical thought inasmuch as it is specifically artistic with scientific thought Rhetoric is intrinsic to scientific consciousness in the same way as it is to artistic consciousness[1]
bull[1] Juri M Lotman ldquoRetoricardquo in Enciclopedia vol XI Torino Einaudi p 1056
Juri Lotman
bull the trope is not an ornament which only belongs to the sphere of expression It is not decoration of invariant content but rather the mechanism for constructing content which cannot be controlled within a single language The trope is a figure that comes into being at the joining point of two languages and in this sense is isostructural to the creative consciousness mechanism as such[1]
bull[1] Ib p 1055
How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory
and practice of translation
In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
bull From my point of view the new cognitivist approaches as the perspectives of textual rhetoric can offer new possibilities to the broad area of studies on translation above all in the direction to go beyond some of the limits of the discipline
J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
Two main branches of discipline1 DESCRIPTIVE part (concerning concrete
translational phenomena) and THEORETICAL part (establishing general principles to explain and predict translational phenomena)
2 APPLIED BRANCH (translator training translation criticism and translation aids)
TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
bull The theoretical aspect was greatly dependent on the descriptive one
bull In contrast with most 20th century epistemology description of facts are influenced by code and described in the light of a specific socio-semiotic system
Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century
newer developments in semantics
How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile
mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of
translation
bull the importance of the role of figurative speech in the new rhetoric is as important to translation as was the explosion of semantics in the cognitive studies and the idea that metaphors structure our world perception
bull Such an appreciation of figurative speech can permit us to go beyond these limits and encourage a possible rethinking of translation studies founded on a wider consideration of the kind of facts which are connected with translation
bull Concept like RHETORICAL FIELD DOMAIN FRAME PROFILE MENTAL SPACE SIMILARITY can be very productive
Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to
another
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for
understanding figurative language
Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does
it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
Interesting research routes
bull Figurative language is not only a formal (syntactic) means but the manifestation of more deeply rooted more general cognitive competence
bull Figurative activity is the ability to construct world images employed in reality
Figures are cognitive processes
bull Anthropological processes because they concern a specifically human characteristic
bull Expressive processes because they refer to the means by which human beings organize their communicative faculties
bull These cognitive processes are not restricted to verbal expression (imaginative faculty myth unconscious domains linked with expressive behavior)
How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions
in research and thinking about language
Roots in the past
bull Nietzsche Darstellung der antike Rhetorik (communication is intrinsically metaphorical because a metaphorical process underpins the formation on concepts)
bull Giambattista Vico De Constantia Philologiae (figures give rise to knowledge we can see the cognitive approach as leading a return to Vico)
How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
Juri Lotman
bull Metaphor and metonymy belong to the field of analogical thought This is why they are organically linked with creative consciousness as such In this sense it is a mistake to contrast rhetorical thought inasmuch as it is specifically artistic with scientific thought Rhetoric is intrinsic to scientific consciousness in the same way as it is to artistic consciousness[1]
bull[1] Juri M Lotman ldquoRetoricardquo in Enciclopedia vol XI Torino Einaudi p 1056
Juri Lotman
bull the trope is not an ornament which only belongs to the sphere of expression It is not decoration of invariant content but rather the mechanism for constructing content which cannot be controlled within a single language The trope is a figure that comes into being at the joining point of two languages and in this sense is isostructural to the creative consciousness mechanism as such[1]
bull[1] Ib p 1055
How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory
and practice of translation
In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
bull From my point of view the new cognitivist approaches as the perspectives of textual rhetoric can offer new possibilities to the broad area of studies on translation above all in the direction to go beyond some of the limits of the discipline
J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
Two main branches of discipline1 DESCRIPTIVE part (concerning concrete
translational phenomena) and THEORETICAL part (establishing general principles to explain and predict translational phenomena)
2 APPLIED BRANCH (translator training translation criticism and translation aids)
TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
bull The theoretical aspect was greatly dependent on the descriptive one
bull In contrast with most 20th century epistemology description of facts are influenced by code and described in the light of a specific socio-semiotic system
Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century
newer developments in semantics
How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile
mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of
translation
bull the importance of the role of figurative speech in the new rhetoric is as important to translation as was the explosion of semantics in the cognitive studies and the idea that metaphors structure our world perception
bull Such an appreciation of figurative speech can permit us to go beyond these limits and encourage a possible rethinking of translation studies founded on a wider consideration of the kind of facts which are connected with translation
bull Concept like RHETORICAL FIELD DOMAIN FRAME PROFILE MENTAL SPACE SIMILARITY can be very productive
Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to
another
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does
it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
Interesting research routes
bull Figurative language is not only a formal (syntactic) means but the manifestation of more deeply rooted more general cognitive competence
bull Figurative activity is the ability to construct world images employed in reality
Figures are cognitive processes
bull Anthropological processes because they concern a specifically human characteristic
bull Expressive processes because they refer to the means by which human beings organize their communicative faculties
bull These cognitive processes are not restricted to verbal expression (imaginative faculty myth unconscious domains linked with expressive behavior)
How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions
in research and thinking about language
Roots in the past
bull Nietzsche Darstellung der antike Rhetorik (communication is intrinsically metaphorical because a metaphorical process underpins the formation on concepts)
bull Giambattista Vico De Constantia Philologiae (figures give rise to knowledge we can see the cognitive approach as leading a return to Vico)
How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
Juri Lotman
bull Metaphor and metonymy belong to the field of analogical thought This is why they are organically linked with creative consciousness as such In this sense it is a mistake to contrast rhetorical thought inasmuch as it is specifically artistic with scientific thought Rhetoric is intrinsic to scientific consciousness in the same way as it is to artistic consciousness[1]
bull[1] Juri M Lotman ldquoRetoricardquo in Enciclopedia vol XI Torino Einaudi p 1056
Juri Lotman
bull the trope is not an ornament which only belongs to the sphere of expression It is not decoration of invariant content but rather the mechanism for constructing content which cannot be controlled within a single language The trope is a figure that comes into being at the joining point of two languages and in this sense is isostructural to the creative consciousness mechanism as such[1]
bull[1] Ib p 1055
How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory
and practice of translation
In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
bull From my point of view the new cognitivist approaches as the perspectives of textual rhetoric can offer new possibilities to the broad area of studies on translation above all in the direction to go beyond some of the limits of the discipline
J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
Two main branches of discipline1 DESCRIPTIVE part (concerning concrete
translational phenomena) and THEORETICAL part (establishing general principles to explain and predict translational phenomena)
2 APPLIED BRANCH (translator training translation criticism and translation aids)
TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
bull The theoretical aspect was greatly dependent on the descriptive one
bull In contrast with most 20th century epistemology description of facts are influenced by code and described in the light of a specific socio-semiotic system
Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century
newer developments in semantics
How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile
mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of
translation
bull the importance of the role of figurative speech in the new rhetoric is as important to translation as was the explosion of semantics in the cognitive studies and the idea that metaphors structure our world perception
bull Such an appreciation of figurative speech can permit us to go beyond these limits and encourage a possible rethinking of translation studies founded on a wider consideration of the kind of facts which are connected with translation
bull Concept like RHETORICAL FIELD DOMAIN FRAME PROFILE MENTAL SPACE SIMILARITY can be very productive
Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to
another
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Interesting research routes
bull Figurative language is not only a formal (syntactic) means but the manifestation of more deeply rooted more general cognitive competence
bull Figurative activity is the ability to construct world images employed in reality
Figures are cognitive processes
bull Anthropological processes because they concern a specifically human characteristic
bull Expressive processes because they refer to the means by which human beings organize their communicative faculties
bull These cognitive processes are not restricted to verbal expression (imaginative faculty myth unconscious domains linked with expressive behavior)
How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions
in research and thinking about language
Roots in the past
bull Nietzsche Darstellung der antike Rhetorik (communication is intrinsically metaphorical because a metaphorical process underpins the formation on concepts)
bull Giambattista Vico De Constantia Philologiae (figures give rise to knowledge we can see the cognitive approach as leading a return to Vico)
How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
Juri Lotman
bull Metaphor and metonymy belong to the field of analogical thought This is why they are organically linked with creative consciousness as such In this sense it is a mistake to contrast rhetorical thought inasmuch as it is specifically artistic with scientific thought Rhetoric is intrinsic to scientific consciousness in the same way as it is to artistic consciousness[1]
bull[1] Juri M Lotman ldquoRetoricardquo in Enciclopedia vol XI Torino Einaudi p 1056
Juri Lotman
bull the trope is not an ornament which only belongs to the sphere of expression It is not decoration of invariant content but rather the mechanism for constructing content which cannot be controlled within a single language The trope is a figure that comes into being at the joining point of two languages and in this sense is isostructural to the creative consciousness mechanism as such[1]
bull[1] Ib p 1055
How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory
and practice of translation
In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
bull From my point of view the new cognitivist approaches as the perspectives of textual rhetoric can offer new possibilities to the broad area of studies on translation above all in the direction to go beyond some of the limits of the discipline
J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
Two main branches of discipline1 DESCRIPTIVE part (concerning concrete
translational phenomena) and THEORETICAL part (establishing general principles to explain and predict translational phenomena)
2 APPLIED BRANCH (translator training translation criticism and translation aids)
TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
bull The theoretical aspect was greatly dependent on the descriptive one
bull In contrast with most 20th century epistemology description of facts are influenced by code and described in the light of a specific socio-semiotic system
Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century
newer developments in semantics
How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile
mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of
translation
bull the importance of the role of figurative speech in the new rhetoric is as important to translation as was the explosion of semantics in the cognitive studies and the idea that metaphors structure our world perception
bull Such an appreciation of figurative speech can permit us to go beyond these limits and encourage a possible rethinking of translation studies founded on a wider consideration of the kind of facts which are connected with translation
bull Concept like RHETORICAL FIELD DOMAIN FRAME PROFILE MENTAL SPACE SIMILARITY can be very productive
Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to
another
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Figures are cognitive processes
bull Anthropological processes because they concern a specifically human characteristic
bull Expressive processes because they refer to the means by which human beings organize their communicative faculties
bull These cognitive processes are not restricted to verbal expression (imaginative faculty myth unconscious domains linked with expressive behavior)
How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions
in research and thinking about language
Roots in the past
bull Nietzsche Darstellung der antike Rhetorik (communication is intrinsically metaphorical because a metaphorical process underpins the formation on concepts)
bull Giambattista Vico De Constantia Philologiae (figures give rise to knowledge we can see the cognitive approach as leading a return to Vico)
How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
Juri Lotman
bull Metaphor and metonymy belong to the field of analogical thought This is why they are organically linked with creative consciousness as such In this sense it is a mistake to contrast rhetorical thought inasmuch as it is specifically artistic with scientific thought Rhetoric is intrinsic to scientific consciousness in the same way as it is to artistic consciousness[1]
bull[1] Juri M Lotman ldquoRetoricardquo in Enciclopedia vol XI Torino Einaudi p 1056
Juri Lotman
bull the trope is not an ornament which only belongs to the sphere of expression It is not decoration of invariant content but rather the mechanism for constructing content which cannot be controlled within a single language The trope is a figure that comes into being at the joining point of two languages and in this sense is isostructural to the creative consciousness mechanism as such[1]
bull[1] Ib p 1055
How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory
and practice of translation
In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
bull From my point of view the new cognitivist approaches as the perspectives of textual rhetoric can offer new possibilities to the broad area of studies on translation above all in the direction to go beyond some of the limits of the discipline
J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
Two main branches of discipline1 DESCRIPTIVE part (concerning concrete
translational phenomena) and THEORETICAL part (establishing general principles to explain and predict translational phenomena)
2 APPLIED BRANCH (translator training translation criticism and translation aids)
TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
bull The theoretical aspect was greatly dependent on the descriptive one
bull In contrast with most 20th century epistemology description of facts are influenced by code and described in the light of a specific socio-semiotic system
Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century
newer developments in semantics
How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile
mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of
translation
bull the importance of the role of figurative speech in the new rhetoric is as important to translation as was the explosion of semantics in the cognitive studies and the idea that metaphors structure our world perception
bull Such an appreciation of figurative speech can permit us to go beyond these limits and encourage a possible rethinking of translation studies founded on a wider consideration of the kind of facts which are connected with translation
bull Concept like RHETORICAL FIELD DOMAIN FRAME PROFILE MENTAL SPACE SIMILARITY can be very productive
Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to
another
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions
in research and thinking about language
Roots in the past
bull Nietzsche Darstellung der antike Rhetorik (communication is intrinsically metaphorical because a metaphorical process underpins the formation on concepts)
bull Giambattista Vico De Constantia Philologiae (figures give rise to knowledge we can see the cognitive approach as leading a return to Vico)
How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
Juri Lotman
bull Metaphor and metonymy belong to the field of analogical thought This is why they are organically linked with creative consciousness as such In this sense it is a mistake to contrast rhetorical thought inasmuch as it is specifically artistic with scientific thought Rhetoric is intrinsic to scientific consciousness in the same way as it is to artistic consciousness[1]
bull[1] Juri M Lotman ldquoRetoricardquo in Enciclopedia vol XI Torino Einaudi p 1056
Juri Lotman
bull the trope is not an ornament which only belongs to the sphere of expression It is not decoration of invariant content but rather the mechanism for constructing content which cannot be controlled within a single language The trope is a figure that comes into being at the joining point of two languages and in this sense is isostructural to the creative consciousness mechanism as such[1]
bull[1] Ib p 1055
How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory
and practice of translation
In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
bull From my point of view the new cognitivist approaches as the perspectives of textual rhetoric can offer new possibilities to the broad area of studies on translation above all in the direction to go beyond some of the limits of the discipline
J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
Two main branches of discipline1 DESCRIPTIVE part (concerning concrete
translational phenomena) and THEORETICAL part (establishing general principles to explain and predict translational phenomena)
2 APPLIED BRANCH (translator training translation criticism and translation aids)
TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
bull The theoretical aspect was greatly dependent on the descriptive one
bull In contrast with most 20th century epistemology description of facts are influenced by code and described in the light of a specific socio-semiotic system
Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century
newer developments in semantics
How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile
mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of
translation
bull the importance of the role of figurative speech in the new rhetoric is as important to translation as was the explosion of semantics in the cognitive studies and the idea that metaphors structure our world perception
bull Such an appreciation of figurative speech can permit us to go beyond these limits and encourage a possible rethinking of translation studies founded on a wider consideration of the kind of facts which are connected with translation
bull Concept like RHETORICAL FIELD DOMAIN FRAME PROFILE MENTAL SPACE SIMILARITY can be very productive
Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to
another
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Roots in the past
bull Nietzsche Darstellung der antike Rhetorik (communication is intrinsically metaphorical because a metaphorical process underpins the formation on concepts)
bull Giambattista Vico De Constantia Philologiae (figures give rise to knowledge we can see the cognitive approach as leading a return to Vico)
How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
Juri Lotman
bull Metaphor and metonymy belong to the field of analogical thought This is why they are organically linked with creative consciousness as such In this sense it is a mistake to contrast rhetorical thought inasmuch as it is specifically artistic with scientific thought Rhetoric is intrinsic to scientific consciousness in the same way as it is to artistic consciousness[1]
bull[1] Juri M Lotman ldquoRetoricardquo in Enciclopedia vol XI Torino Einaudi p 1056
Juri Lotman
bull the trope is not an ornament which only belongs to the sphere of expression It is not decoration of invariant content but rather the mechanism for constructing content which cannot be controlled within a single language The trope is a figure that comes into being at the joining point of two languages and in this sense is isostructural to the creative consciousness mechanism as such[1]
bull[1] Ib p 1055
How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory
and practice of translation
In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
bull From my point of view the new cognitivist approaches as the perspectives of textual rhetoric can offer new possibilities to the broad area of studies on translation above all in the direction to go beyond some of the limits of the discipline
J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
Two main branches of discipline1 DESCRIPTIVE part (concerning concrete
translational phenomena) and THEORETICAL part (establishing general principles to explain and predict translational phenomena)
2 APPLIED BRANCH (translator training translation criticism and translation aids)
TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
bull The theoretical aspect was greatly dependent on the descriptive one
bull In contrast with most 20th century epistemology description of facts are influenced by code and described in the light of a specific socio-semiotic system
Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century
newer developments in semantics
How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile
mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of
translation
bull the importance of the role of figurative speech in the new rhetoric is as important to translation as was the explosion of semantics in the cognitive studies and the idea that metaphors structure our world perception
bull Such an appreciation of figurative speech can permit us to go beyond these limits and encourage a possible rethinking of translation studies founded on a wider consideration of the kind of facts which are connected with translation
bull Concept like RHETORICAL FIELD DOMAIN FRAME PROFILE MENTAL SPACE SIMILARITY can be very productive
Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to
another
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
Juri Lotman
bull Metaphor and metonymy belong to the field of analogical thought This is why they are organically linked with creative consciousness as such In this sense it is a mistake to contrast rhetorical thought inasmuch as it is specifically artistic with scientific thought Rhetoric is intrinsic to scientific consciousness in the same way as it is to artistic consciousness[1]
bull[1] Juri M Lotman ldquoRetoricardquo in Enciclopedia vol XI Torino Einaudi p 1056
Juri Lotman
bull the trope is not an ornament which only belongs to the sphere of expression It is not decoration of invariant content but rather the mechanism for constructing content which cannot be controlled within a single language The trope is a figure that comes into being at the joining point of two languages and in this sense is isostructural to the creative consciousness mechanism as such[1]
bull[1] Ib p 1055
How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory
and practice of translation
In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
bull From my point of view the new cognitivist approaches as the perspectives of textual rhetoric can offer new possibilities to the broad area of studies on translation above all in the direction to go beyond some of the limits of the discipline
J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
Two main branches of discipline1 DESCRIPTIVE part (concerning concrete
translational phenomena) and THEORETICAL part (establishing general principles to explain and predict translational phenomena)
2 APPLIED BRANCH (translator training translation criticism and translation aids)
TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
bull The theoretical aspect was greatly dependent on the descriptive one
bull In contrast with most 20th century epistemology description of facts are influenced by code and described in the light of a specific socio-semiotic system
Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century
newer developments in semantics
How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile
mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of
translation
bull the importance of the role of figurative speech in the new rhetoric is as important to translation as was the explosion of semantics in the cognitive studies and the idea that metaphors structure our world perception
bull Such an appreciation of figurative speech can permit us to go beyond these limits and encourage a possible rethinking of translation studies founded on a wider consideration of the kind of facts which are connected with translation
bull Concept like RHETORICAL FIELD DOMAIN FRAME PROFILE MENTAL SPACE SIMILARITY can be very productive
Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to
another
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Juri Lotman
bull Metaphor and metonymy belong to the field of analogical thought This is why they are organically linked with creative consciousness as such In this sense it is a mistake to contrast rhetorical thought inasmuch as it is specifically artistic with scientific thought Rhetoric is intrinsic to scientific consciousness in the same way as it is to artistic consciousness[1]
bull[1] Juri M Lotman ldquoRetoricardquo in Enciclopedia vol XI Torino Einaudi p 1056
Juri Lotman
bull the trope is not an ornament which only belongs to the sphere of expression It is not decoration of invariant content but rather the mechanism for constructing content which cannot be controlled within a single language The trope is a figure that comes into being at the joining point of two languages and in this sense is isostructural to the creative consciousness mechanism as such[1]
bull[1] Ib p 1055
How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory
and practice of translation
In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
bull From my point of view the new cognitivist approaches as the perspectives of textual rhetoric can offer new possibilities to the broad area of studies on translation above all in the direction to go beyond some of the limits of the discipline
J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
Two main branches of discipline1 DESCRIPTIVE part (concerning concrete
translational phenomena) and THEORETICAL part (establishing general principles to explain and predict translational phenomena)
2 APPLIED BRANCH (translator training translation criticism and translation aids)
TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
bull The theoretical aspect was greatly dependent on the descriptive one
bull In contrast with most 20th century epistemology description of facts are influenced by code and described in the light of a specific socio-semiotic system
Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century
newer developments in semantics
How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile
mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of
translation
bull the importance of the role of figurative speech in the new rhetoric is as important to translation as was the explosion of semantics in the cognitive studies and the idea that metaphors structure our world perception
bull Such an appreciation of figurative speech can permit us to go beyond these limits and encourage a possible rethinking of translation studies founded on a wider consideration of the kind of facts which are connected with translation
bull Concept like RHETORICAL FIELD DOMAIN FRAME PROFILE MENTAL SPACE SIMILARITY can be very productive
Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to
another
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Juri Lotman
bull the trope is not an ornament which only belongs to the sphere of expression It is not decoration of invariant content but rather the mechanism for constructing content which cannot be controlled within a single language The trope is a figure that comes into being at the joining point of two languages and in this sense is isostructural to the creative consciousness mechanism as such[1]
bull[1] Ib p 1055
How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory
and practice of translation
In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
bull From my point of view the new cognitivist approaches as the perspectives of textual rhetoric can offer new possibilities to the broad area of studies on translation above all in the direction to go beyond some of the limits of the discipline
J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
Two main branches of discipline1 DESCRIPTIVE part (concerning concrete
translational phenomena) and THEORETICAL part (establishing general principles to explain and predict translational phenomena)
2 APPLIED BRANCH (translator training translation criticism and translation aids)
TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
bull The theoretical aspect was greatly dependent on the descriptive one
bull In contrast with most 20th century epistemology description of facts are influenced by code and described in the light of a specific socio-semiotic system
Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century
newer developments in semantics
How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile
mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of
translation
bull the importance of the role of figurative speech in the new rhetoric is as important to translation as was the explosion of semantics in the cognitive studies and the idea that metaphors structure our world perception
bull Such an appreciation of figurative speech can permit us to go beyond these limits and encourage a possible rethinking of translation studies founded on a wider consideration of the kind of facts which are connected with translation
bull Concept like RHETORICAL FIELD DOMAIN FRAME PROFILE MENTAL SPACE SIMILARITY can be very productive
Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to
another
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory
and practice of translation
In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
bull From my point of view the new cognitivist approaches as the perspectives of textual rhetoric can offer new possibilities to the broad area of studies on translation above all in the direction to go beyond some of the limits of the discipline
J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
Two main branches of discipline1 DESCRIPTIVE part (concerning concrete
translational phenomena) and THEORETICAL part (establishing general principles to explain and predict translational phenomena)
2 APPLIED BRANCH (translator training translation criticism and translation aids)
TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
bull The theoretical aspect was greatly dependent on the descriptive one
bull In contrast with most 20th century epistemology description of facts are influenced by code and described in the light of a specific socio-semiotic system
Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century
newer developments in semantics
How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile
mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of
translation
bull the importance of the role of figurative speech in the new rhetoric is as important to translation as was the explosion of semantics in the cognitive studies and the idea that metaphors structure our world perception
bull Such an appreciation of figurative speech can permit us to go beyond these limits and encourage a possible rethinking of translation studies founded on a wider consideration of the kind of facts which are connected with translation
bull Concept like RHETORICAL FIELD DOMAIN FRAME PROFILE MENTAL SPACE SIMILARITY can be very productive
Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to
another
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory
and practice of translation
In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
bull From my point of view the new cognitivist approaches as the perspectives of textual rhetoric can offer new possibilities to the broad area of studies on translation above all in the direction to go beyond some of the limits of the discipline
J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
Two main branches of discipline1 DESCRIPTIVE part (concerning concrete
translational phenomena) and THEORETICAL part (establishing general principles to explain and predict translational phenomena)
2 APPLIED BRANCH (translator training translation criticism and translation aids)
TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
bull The theoretical aspect was greatly dependent on the descriptive one
bull In contrast with most 20th century epistemology description of facts are influenced by code and described in the light of a specific socio-semiotic system
Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century
newer developments in semantics
How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile
mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of
translation
bull the importance of the role of figurative speech in the new rhetoric is as important to translation as was the explosion of semantics in the cognitive studies and the idea that metaphors structure our world perception
bull Such an appreciation of figurative speech can permit us to go beyond these limits and encourage a possible rethinking of translation studies founded on a wider consideration of the kind of facts which are connected with translation
bull Concept like RHETORICAL FIELD DOMAIN FRAME PROFILE MENTAL SPACE SIMILARITY can be very productive
Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to
another
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
bull From my point of view the new cognitivist approaches as the perspectives of textual rhetoric can offer new possibilities to the broad area of studies on translation above all in the direction to go beyond some of the limits of the discipline
J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
Two main branches of discipline1 DESCRIPTIVE part (concerning concrete
translational phenomena) and THEORETICAL part (establishing general principles to explain and predict translational phenomena)
2 APPLIED BRANCH (translator training translation criticism and translation aids)
TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
bull The theoretical aspect was greatly dependent on the descriptive one
bull In contrast with most 20th century epistemology description of facts are influenced by code and described in the light of a specific socio-semiotic system
Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century
newer developments in semantics
How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile
mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of
translation
bull the importance of the role of figurative speech in the new rhetoric is as important to translation as was the explosion of semantics in the cognitive studies and the idea that metaphors structure our world perception
bull Such an appreciation of figurative speech can permit us to go beyond these limits and encourage a possible rethinking of translation studies founded on a wider consideration of the kind of facts which are connected with translation
bull Concept like RHETORICAL FIELD DOMAIN FRAME PROFILE MENTAL SPACE SIMILARITY can be very productive
Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to
another
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
bull From my point of view the new cognitivist approaches as the perspectives of textual rhetoric can offer new possibilities to the broad area of studies on translation above all in the direction to go beyond some of the limits of the discipline
J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
Two main branches of discipline1 DESCRIPTIVE part (concerning concrete
translational phenomena) and THEORETICAL part (establishing general principles to explain and predict translational phenomena)
2 APPLIED BRANCH (translator training translation criticism and translation aids)
TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
bull The theoretical aspect was greatly dependent on the descriptive one
bull In contrast with most 20th century epistemology description of facts are influenced by code and described in the light of a specific socio-semiotic system
Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century
newer developments in semantics
How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile
mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of
translation
bull the importance of the role of figurative speech in the new rhetoric is as important to translation as was the explosion of semantics in the cognitive studies and the idea that metaphors structure our world perception
bull Such an appreciation of figurative speech can permit us to go beyond these limits and encourage a possible rethinking of translation studies founded on a wider consideration of the kind of facts which are connected with translation
bull Concept like RHETORICAL FIELD DOMAIN FRAME PROFILE MENTAL SPACE SIMILARITY can be very productive
Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to
another
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
Two main branches of discipline1 DESCRIPTIVE part (concerning concrete
translational phenomena) and THEORETICAL part (establishing general principles to explain and predict translational phenomena)
2 APPLIED BRANCH (translator training translation criticism and translation aids)
TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
bull The theoretical aspect was greatly dependent on the descriptive one
bull In contrast with most 20th century epistemology description of facts are influenced by code and described in the light of a specific socio-semiotic system
Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century
newer developments in semantics
How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile
mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of
translation
bull the importance of the role of figurative speech in the new rhetoric is as important to translation as was the explosion of semantics in the cognitive studies and the idea that metaphors structure our world perception
bull Such an appreciation of figurative speech can permit us to go beyond these limits and encourage a possible rethinking of translation studies founded on a wider consideration of the kind of facts which are connected with translation
bull Concept like RHETORICAL FIELD DOMAIN FRAME PROFILE MENTAL SPACE SIMILARITY can be very productive
Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to
another
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
bull The theoretical aspect was greatly dependent on the descriptive one
bull In contrast with most 20th century epistemology description of facts are influenced by code and described in the light of a specific socio-semiotic system
Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century
newer developments in semantics
How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile
mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of
translation
bull the importance of the role of figurative speech in the new rhetoric is as important to translation as was the explosion of semantics in the cognitive studies and the idea that metaphors structure our world perception
bull Such an appreciation of figurative speech can permit us to go beyond these limits and encourage a possible rethinking of translation studies founded on a wider consideration of the kind of facts which are connected with translation
bull Concept like RHETORICAL FIELD DOMAIN FRAME PROFILE MENTAL SPACE SIMILARITY can be very productive
Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to
another
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century
newer developments in semantics
How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile
mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of
translation
bull the importance of the role of figurative speech in the new rhetoric is as important to translation as was the explosion of semantics in the cognitive studies and the idea that metaphors structure our world perception
bull Such an appreciation of figurative speech can permit us to go beyond these limits and encourage a possible rethinking of translation studies founded on a wider consideration of the kind of facts which are connected with translation
bull Concept like RHETORICAL FIELD DOMAIN FRAME PROFILE MENTAL SPACE SIMILARITY can be very productive
Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to
another
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile
mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of
translation
bull the importance of the role of figurative speech in the new rhetoric is as important to translation as was the explosion of semantics in the cognitive studies and the idea that metaphors structure our world perception
bull Such an appreciation of figurative speech can permit us to go beyond these limits and encourage a possible rethinking of translation studies founded on a wider consideration of the kind of facts which are connected with translation
bull Concept like RHETORICAL FIELD DOMAIN FRAME PROFILE MENTAL SPACE SIMILARITY can be very productive
Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to
another
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
bull the importance of the role of figurative speech in the new rhetoric is as important to translation as was the explosion of semantics in the cognitive studies and the idea that metaphors structure our world perception
bull Such an appreciation of figurative speech can permit us to go beyond these limits and encourage a possible rethinking of translation studies founded on a wider consideration of the kind of facts which are connected with translation
bull Concept like RHETORICAL FIELD DOMAIN FRAME PROFILE MENTAL SPACE SIMILARITY can be very productive
Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to
another
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
bull Concept like RHETORICAL FIELD DOMAIN FRAME PROFILE MENTAL SPACE SIMILARITY can be very productive
Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to
another
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to
another
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to
another
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Partial equivalence
bull In Italian ldquocasardquo (house) presumes a frame that specifies some important structural characteristics
bull English ldquohouserdquo is outlined by physical objects while ldquohomerdquo conveys to the affective sphere
bull BUT both ldquohouserdquo and ldquohomerdquo are translated in Italian into ldquocasardquo
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
bull The Italian term for ldquoeatrdquo ldquomangiarerdquo stands for the process of consuming food
bull In German we have ldquoessenrdquo and ldquofressenrdquo both describe the process of consuming food but one is used for human beings and the other for animals
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
bull ldquoto genuflectrdquo is a movement of the body more or less the same concept of kneel down but ldquoto genuflectrdquo belongs to a more specific frame which is Catholic liturgical use
bull Often the frames are very culturally specific translating imply a loss (there is non- equivalence of frames)
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the
problem of non-translatability
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar
examples
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
bull In the XVII century it meant something worth of particular attention
bull In successive age it changed its meaning into someone who is expert of making love
bull In the XIX century it stands for a behavior of the geishas the ability to move in situations under pressure Therefore the ability of being deceiving spontaneous and elegant
bull The maximum level of the Japanese culture It can mean elegance but also to despise someone and at last it can stand for the best behavior and essence of someone
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
ldquoespritrdquo
bull Germans generally translate it with ldquoGeistrdquo (but it doesnrsquot have the same meaning)
bull Not even ldquogeistreichrdquo is exhaustive
bull ldquoEspritrdquo doesnrsquot have a perfect translation into English ldquospiritrdquo and ldquointelligencerdquo diminsh its meaning while ldquowitrdquo is excessive
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
bull The reason why ldquoikirdquo ldquoespritrdquo and ldquoBildungrdquo are not translatable is due to the fact that specific cultural characteristics of the frame against which the concept is profiled
bull Translating ldquoikirdquo with ldquoelegancerdquo ldquoespritrdquo with ldquoGeistrdquo or ldquoBildungrdquo with ldquoculturerdquo creates an approximate equivalence between the profiles but absolutely non on the frame level
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
END OF PRESENTATION ONE
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
PRESENTATION TWO
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in
western philosophy
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify
this mistranslation
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
bull B1 The first fragment is the proem It describes a trip Parmenides takes on a chariot to the house of Dike who offers to teach him how to distinguish between discourse founded on truth (aletheia) and discourse founded on human experience
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
bull B2-B3 This fragment is the logical consequence It points at the method to attain what has been laid out earlier There are two ways for the investigation (odoi dizesios) The first one is a persuasive method and leads to truth (it will be revealed in B8) the second cannot be pursued because that which does not exist cannot be known Being and thinking are one and the same thing (thinking-seeing) one can only think know and talk about what is
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
bull B4-B5 (B5-B4) These fragments develop the line of argument whereby doxa and aletheia are not opposite They are one and the same reality which becomes the object of sensible perception and discourse
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
bull B6 This fragment completes B2-B3 One can think and express what is but one cannot talk about nothingness Therefore the method that does not reflect reality must be dropped however one should not be misled by realitys contradictions and confusion
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
bull B7-B8 This is the beginning of the part thatmdashas it is statedmdashconcerns Being (to eon Being or that which is) Being is not generated and is indestructible its totality is immutable it has no goal to tend to It has neither past nor future but it is always present It has no birth nor growth because outside of it there is only me eon nothingness It exists in an absolute sense it is not born it does not die It is equivalent to itself because it expresses being at its fullest Because the processes of birth and death are alien to it it is immutable stationary not incomplete and nothing is wanting in it If thinking is worth only to the extent it reflects that which is and if it must be expressed within the constraints of reality the names men give to eon are necessarily untrue Such terms as being born dying and the like are true only relative to the mutability of phenomena and of mans everyday experiences Relative to that which is they are untrue That which is is an order without divisions it is homogeneous These considerations bring the discourse about truth to a close
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
bull Line 50 marks the beginning of the second part which will interest us After closing the part about the semata of eon sensible reality is ushered into the discourse Here discourse cannot be as precise as before what follows will be a way for arranging sensible reality In order to make sense of the world and its changeability men decided to name two elements pur and nux If unity is the inevitable principle to explain eons semata duality is required to explain the semata of eonta
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
bull B9 This fragment completes the last lines in 8 To justify their experiences men must identify two elements in this case light and night out of whose mix all the things issue This duality does not imply contradiction as a principle to make sense of sensible reality duality is as legitimate as unity was for the abstract world
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
bull B10-B19 These fragments include an account of Parmenides theory on the origin and nature of the universe the stars earth the moon mans pathology and physiology and the origin of thought Very little of it has survived but we are in luck because this part is irrelevant to our point
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Fragment B8 lines 50-52
bull [50] Ἐν τῷ σοι παύω πιστὸν λόγον ἠδὲ νόηmicroαbull ἀmicroφὶς ἀληθείης δόξας δ΄ ἀπὸ τοῦδε βροτείαςbull microάνθανε κόσmicroον ἐmicroῶν ἐπέων ἀπατηλὸν ἀκούωνbull Μορφὰς γὰρ κατέθεντο δύο γνώmicroας ὀνοmicroάζεινbull τῶν microίαν οὐ χρεών ἐστιν - ἐν ᾧ πεπλανηmicroένοι εἰσίν -bull [55] τἀντία δ΄ ἐκρίναντο δέmicroας καὶ σήmicroατ΄ ἔθεντοbull χωρὶς ἀπ΄ ἀλλήλων τῇ microὲν φλογὸς αἰθέριον πῦρbull ἤπιον ὄν microέγ΄ ἐλαφρόν ἑωυτῷ πάντοσε τωὐτόνbull τῷ δ΄ ἑτέρῳ microὴ τωὐτόν ἀτὰρ κἀκεῖνο κατ΄ αὐτόbull τἀντία νύκτ΄ ἀδαῆ πυκινὸν δέmicroας ἐmicroϐριθές τε
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
850 Here I end my trustworthy account and thought concerning truth From now on learn the beliefs of mortals listening to the deceptive order of my words
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto
Press 1984)
850 Here I stop my trustworthy speech to you and thought
About truth from here onwards learn mortal beliefs
Listening to the deceitful ordering of my words
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
8 50 Con ciograve interrompo il discorso certo e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave drsquoora in poi apprendi le esperienze degli uomini
ascoltando lrsquoordine che puograve trarre in inganno delle mie parole
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
850 Con ciograve interrompo il mio discorso degno di fede e i miei pensieri
intorno alla veritagrave da questo punto le opinioni dei mortali impara
a comprendere ascoltando lrsquoingannevole andamento delle mie parole
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
850 E qui termino il discorso della certezza e il pensiero
intorno alla veritagrave e da questo momento apprendi le opinioni dei mortali
ascoltando lrsquoordine ingannevole che nasce dalle mie parole
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
850 Ici je mets fin agrave mon discours digne de foi et agrave ma consideacuteration qui cerne la veacuteriteacute apprends donc agrave partir drsquoici qursquoont en vue les mortels en eacutecoutant lrsquoordre trompeur de mes dires
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute
Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
850 Sobre lo cual dejo de pronunciar mi discurso digno de fe y ceso en mi pensamiento
referente a la verdad En adelante seraacuten las opiniones de los mortales
las que tuacute podraacutes aprender al dar oiacutedos a la ordenacioacuten engantildeosa de mis versos
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive
orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo
translation of the text
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
koacutesmon apateloacuten
bull deceptive orderlsquo
bull ordine ingannevole
bull ordre trompeur
bull ordenacioacuten engantildeosa
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Simplicius
bull Simplicius advised not to interpret logos doxastoacutes and apateloacutes as logos pseudeacutes (false) but rather as a discourse that went beyond intelligible truth to cover the world of the senses
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
bull This is the certain discourse about truthbull This phrase can be referred back to lines 28-32 in B1bull The goddess says that one should attain a knowledge that
includes both (emeacuten) THE TRUTH (aletheia) and (edeacute) what is called doxa
bull In two places (B 128 and B 131) the goddess repeats that knowledge should include ta dokoacuteunta
bull It follows that doxa and dokoacuteunta have no negative values attached to them the genuinely wise man investigates in all directions (B132)
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Doacutexas broteacuteias
bull The discourse of the world of human opinions follows the pistoacutes logos about to eon
bull Doxai must be comprehended (maacutenthane) one cannot build a pistoacutes logos on their basis all we can do is try and interpret them through a koacutesmos apateloacutes
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Koacutesmon apateloacutes
bull Koacutesmos apateloacutes is not a loacutegos pseudeacutes deceitful discourse or reasoning
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
bull In ancient Greece (eg in Thucydides III 43 2) apaacutete is a creative act of the intellect which transforms something (whereas pseudeacutes possesses an ethical undertone of lying and must be condemned)
bull In Homer the act of apaacutete is often attributed to a god and directed to other gods or mortals (apaacutete = intellectual creativity and the godsrsquo superiority over men)
bull Apaacutete as an act is carried out through peacuteithein persuasion - a nexus that we already find in Homer - and constitutes a world alternative to our own
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
bull in Hesiods ltTeogoniagt (line 224) apaacutete becomes a goddess daughter of the night and dweller of a world that is irrational or at least that logico-formal investigation cannot fathom
bull in the ltTeogoniagt Hesiod accurately distinguishes apaacutete from falsehood in a place where the Muses put the former close to truth in poetry
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
bull in the Homeric hymns apaacutete is also associated with musing and joie de vivre
bull Beginning with the school of Pythagoras the notion of apaacutete is linked with that of kairoacutes the ltright momentgt
bull kairoacutes is one of the universal laws which finds its origin in Pythagorean philosophy and in the doctrine of the opposites which - held together by harmony - generate the universe
bull kairoacutes allows one to highlight a logos or its opposite and the upshot is apaacutete
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
bull This apaacutete can also be identified with dike (the law of the world) because the world is irrational and this irrationality can be represented only through it
bull Men experience paacutethema through apaacutete and this constitutes a koacutesmos This is an idea which Aeschylus well illustrated in his ltCoeforegt and which pervades all classical Greece
bull The author of Dissoi Logoi takes up the notion to introduce it into the world of art
bull Gorgias too will interpret apaacutete as a basic element of poetic experience
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
bull In Parmenides apateloacutes has the same character we found in Gorgias
bull koacutesmon apateloacuten is the correlative to pistoacutes loacutegos for the sensible world
bull It is the order that follows the complexity of reality and tries to interpret it and relive it by narratives means
bull It is emphatically not a deceitful order but one that allows us a nonndashabstract knowledge of complexity irrationality and passions which can all be managed by fiction
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a
perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten
as a deceptive order of things
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
bull We can therefore affirm that in Parmenides the fictional order - eg of myth and tragedy -is a perfectly legitimate way to knowledge the only one that allows us to come close enough to the world of eonta
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
bull It remains to be explained why all the translations we have seen above refer to an inexistent deceit
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
bull the one for to eon in the sense of stationary and immutable perfection uses the language of logic
bull the other for experience requires a koacutesmon apateloacuten a narrative language
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Reality is not given
bull It follows that reality is not given but depends on the languages we employ
bull Ultimately reality is nothing else than the object of interpretation as Freud and Niestzsche would maintain in our day
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
bull Gorgias would take the way of loacutegos apateloacutes discarding Parmenides noema In fact for him truth does not exist and even if it existed it could not be communicated because there is no correspondence between truth and words
bull Plato would instead choose the other way he stripped loacutegos apateloacutes of any value and identified it with loacutegos pseudeacutes
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo
view of being
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his
philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Plato
bull Sophist (here the Platorsquos confutation of Parmenides is lsquorelativersquo)
bull Phaedo (Parmenides two ways get totally reinterpreted in the Phaedo and consequently the sensible world and the koacutesmos apateloacutes are deprived of value)
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Johnrsquos Gospel
bull ldquoEn archeacute en o Loacutegos rdquo
bull Jerome rendered the incipit ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
To what extent does research into figurative language help us
understand the gains and losses
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoItalian
1 ldquoIn principio era il verbordquo versione CEI
2 ldquoAl principio crsquoera colui che egrave ldquola Parolardquordquo versione interconfessionale in lingua corrente
3 ldquoIn principio era la Parolardquo Societagrave Biblica Britannica e Forestiera Roma 1999
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish
1 ldquoIn the beginning was the wordrdquo Tyndale NT 1526 Geneva Version 1557-1560
Rheims NT 1582 King James Version 1611 Revised Standard Version 1946 New American Standard Version 1960 New King James Bible 1979-1982 New Revised Standard Version 1989 New International Version 1973 New American Bible 1970 Jerusalem Bible 1966 New Jerusalem Bible 1985
2 ldquoWhen all things began the Word already wasrdquo New English Bible 1970
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoEnglish (2)
3 ldquoBefore the world was created the Word already existedrdquo Good News Translation 1966-1976
4 ldquoBefore anything else existed there was Christ with Godrdquo Living Bible 11966-1976
5 ldquoIn the beginning was the one who is called the Wordrdquo Contemporary English Version 1991-1995
6 ldquoThe Word was firstrdquo Eugene H Peterson ldquoThe Messagerdquo 1993
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish
1 ldquoEn el principio ya era la Palabrardquo Reina 1569 Valera 16022 ldquoEn el principio era el Verbordquo Scio de San Miguel 1793 Moderna
1893 Biblia de las Americas 1973 Reina-Valera 1960 revision RV 1995 revision
3 ldquoEn el principio era ya el Verbordquo Torres Amat 1823-18254 ldquoAl principio era el Verbordquo Nacar amp Colunga 1966 Garofalo 19695 ldquoCuando todo comenzo ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1966
19706 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular 1979 1983
19947 ldquoEn el principio existia El Verbordquo Latinoamericana 1971
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoSpanish (2)
8 ldquoEn el principio la Palabra existiardquo Jerusalem Bible 19679 ldquoEn el principio existia la Palabrardquo Nueva Version
Internacional 198010 ldquoEn el principio ya existia la Palabrardquo Version Popular
3rd ed 199511 ldquoEn el principio ya existia el Verbordquo Nueva Veraion
Internactional 1999 12 ldquoAl principio ya existiacutea la calabrardquo Mateos-Schoumlkel13 ldquoAntes de que todo comenzara ya existia aquel que es la
Palabrardquo TLA (= Traduccion en lenguaje actual) 2003
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench
1 ldquoAu commencement etait la parolerdquo Lefevre drsquoEtaples 1530 Olivetan 1535 Chateillon 1555 Diodati 1644 Martin 1712 Segond 1880-1978 Nouvelle Bible Segond 2002 Synodale 1910
2 ldquoAu commencement etait le verberdquo Louvain 1550 3 ldquoLa parole etait des le commencementrdquo Beausobre amp
Lenfant 1718 4 ldquoLa parole etait au commencementrdquo Ostervald 1824 5 ldquoAu commencement de tous les temps etait deja le Verberdquo
de Sacy (Port Royal) 1667 6 ldquoAu commencement le Verbe etaitrdquo Jerusalem 1953
1956
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoFrench (2)
7 ldquoAu commencement etait le Verberdquo Jerusalem 1973 1998 Osty 1955-1973 Maredsous 1948 Crampon 1952 TOB (= Traduction OEcumenique de la Bible) 1972-1988
8 ldquoAu principe etait la parolerdquo Pleiade 19719 ldquoAvant que Dieu cree le monde la Parole existait dejardquo
FC (= Francais Courant) 1971 10 ldquoAu commencement lorsque Dieu crea le monde la
Parole existait dejardquo FC 1982 11 ldquoAu commencement la parole existait dejardquo FF (=
Francais Fondamental) 1989-2000
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquoGerman
1 ldquoIm Anfang(e) war das Wortrdquo 1466 Bible (based on 14th c ms) Luther 1522 Zuerich 1531 van Ess 1807 (we have only 1816 ed) Allioli 1830 (we have only 1866 ed) Herder (Jerusalem) 1966 Einheitsuebersetzung 1972 1980
2 ldquoBevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war das Wort schon dardquo Gute Nachricht 1967
3 ldquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war schon der der ldquoDas Wortrdquo heisstrdquo GN 1971
4 rdquoAm Anfang bevor die Welt geschaffen wurde war Er der lsquoDas Wortrsquo istrdquo GN 1982
5 ldquoAm Anfang war das ewige Wort Gottes Christusrdquo Living Bibles International 1983 1991
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Some notes on Greek linguistics
bull The Greek term loacutegos is strongly polysemous It does mean word but in Homer for instance it appears only twice with this meaning and only in its plural form In fact it can also mean the following
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
1 expression way of saying2 saying telling but also rumour renown news3 discourse conversation dialogue discussion4 tale narration scientific and literary genres5 reason and reasoning6 explanation justification account counting7 opinion assessment8 relationship correspondence ratio rationale analogy9 divine idea or thought (eg in Plotinus)
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Latin translation of loacutegos include
bull Ratio
bull Sermo
bull Oratio
bull Verbum is closer to Greek lexis onoma or sema
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are
some of these
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Philo of Alexandria
bull Loacutegos was a link between God and the world
bull This idea runs beneath the interpretations of Johns Loacutegos among the early Fathers of the church although these latter insisted on two basic points i) Logos-Son is a perfect peer to God the Father ii) humankind participates in Logos
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices
with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between
traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Origin
bull Loacutegos not God is the being of beings the substance of substances the idea of ideas God instead is beyond all this
bull In this sense Loacutegos is co-eternal to the Father but not in the same sense
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the
philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
bull Justinrsquos Book of Wisdom
bull Eusebio of Cesarea
bull Cyrill of Alexandria
bull Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Gregorio of Nazanzio
bull Loacutegos is the link between man and the divine Loacutegos the continuty between divine and the human
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Cyprianus
bull Used sermo to arrive at the following for Johns incipit in principio erat sermordquo (Testimoniarum libri adversus Iuddaeos)
bull verbum by contrast is used only in quotations
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Novatianus
bull He uses both sermo and verbum although he seems to prefer sermo
bull De Trinitate Verbum made itself into flesh and lived among us in this way it really had our body because sermo really takes up our flesh
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Tertullianus Apologeticum
bull Even among your wise men logos--which means sermo and ratio--was the creator of the universe (21 10)
bull For us too sermo and ratio as well as virtus through which God created everything are but one substance which we consider the spirit Sermo is in Him in so far as it pronounces itself ratio assists when He decrees and virtus presides when He accomplishes His work (21 11)
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Goete Faust
bull Wort (word)
bull Kraft (power)
bull Sinn (meaning)
bull Tat (deed)
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
bull ldquoIn the beginning was the Rhythmrdquo
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
bull God is rational and ratio is in Him first therefore everything proceeds from Him This ratio is His mind The Greeks called it logos a term we use also to say sermo This is why we usually translate in a simple way sermo was originally with God
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
bull However it would be better to consider ratio older because God is not a speaker since the beginning but He is rational even before the beginning and also because sermo which consists in ratio shows that it is preceded by the latter as far as substance is concerned But it makes no difference In fact even when God had not spoken His sermo yet He already had ratio and He had sermo in Himself He was silently thinking and arranging within Himself that which he would later say by means of sermohellip (5 2-7)
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Tertullianus
bull Sermo is speech faculty ( not to speech)
bull Dialogical idea of loacutegos
bull Sermo is a process rather than a static entity it is that which can generate a creative force which in the beginning acted according to ratio
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
bull the Son is the sermo of God whereas angels are His spiritus And if spiritus manifests itself without sound sermo proceeds from the mouth therefore with voice and sound
bull helliploacutegos means both sermo and ratio because it is the voice and the wisdom of God at a time Not even Pagan philosophers ignore this divine sermo (4 9)
bull Loacutegos represents Godrsquos creative power
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the
translation of loacutegos
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational
choice
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Augustineverbum replaces sermo
bull Augustine chooses verbum as opposed to ratio loacutegos is not more polysemous but it only means ldquoindividual wordrdquo
bull Augustine eliminates the termrsquos dialogical implications
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Why
bull from a dynamic theology of dialogue to a static theology of the word
bull Moreover this ltnewgt translation implies a conceptualization of Gods verbal activity that holds a highly complex relationship with that of man In Augustine Gods verbum is the founding metaphor of Christ
bull Divine loacutegos is not a sound emitted by phonatory organs but a will It is an inner mental loacutegos (comparable to de divine one)
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
bull Like our word (verbum) somehow becomes voice when it issues from our body to manifest itself to the senses so Gods Word (verbum) became flesh to manifest itself to mens senses ltAnd like our word is carried by voice but it does not turn into voice so Gods Word was truly carried by flesh but in no way did it actually turn into flesh (De Trinitate XV 11 20)gt
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Per speculum in aenigmate
bull Human word refers to the divine Word per speculum in aenigmate because it reflects the minds spiritual interiority in this sense it can be its METAPHOR
bull However the soul cannot manifest itself through words alone because it includes an ineffable part which--aacute la Wittgenstein--escapes conscience itself Such ineffability and incommunicability merely manifest the non-coincidence of word to reality and gives rise to our ability to lie
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
bull This is the clearest difference between human word and divine Word In God Word and reality coincide because God generated reality to show Himself identical to the generator (De fide et symbolo III 4) The Word is also called the self-present Truth precisely because of its complete identity with God We can find here a very strong commitment to totality
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it
impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
bull 1515 ldquoIn principio erat verbumrdquo
bull 1519 ldquoIn principio erat sermordquo
bull 1520 Apologia de In principio erat sermo
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
bull Logos Graecis varia significat verbum orationem sermonem rationem modum supputationem nonnunquam et pro libro usurpatur a verbo lego quod est dico sive colligo Horum pleraque divus Hieronymus aliqua ratione putat competere Filium Dei Miror autem cur verbum Latinis placuerit magis quam sermo Nos tametsi videbamus sermonis vocabolo rectius esprimi Graecam vocem qua usus est Evangelista logos tamen in Editione prima superstizioso quodam metu non mutaveramus verbum quod posuerat Interpres ne quam ansam daremus iis qui quidvis ad quamvis occasionem calumniantur
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
(Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
bull Tantum testati sumus alicubi sermonis nomine non infrequenter signari Filium Dei in Sacris Volumnibus Mox ubi comperimus hoc tam passina fieri et hoc ipso in loco quondam Ecclesiam legisse In principio erat sermo atque ita citari in libris Cypriani et Augustini non existimabam quemquam fore qui offenderetur praesertim cum haec demus non in Templis sed in Musaeis legendardquo
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
A possible objection to Erasmus
bull verbum is a conceptus tacitus more applicable to Christ than sermo which indicates a conceptus expressus voce
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Erasmusrsquo reply
bull Erasmus makes reference to the metaphorical ability of the human mind
bull The loacutegos metaphor is telling us that the Son of God is neither an unuttered nor a spoken concept it is something more and utterly different and irreducible which--at any rate--the translation cannot simplify
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
bull Different names are adapted to the divine persons on the basis of the habits of human language thanks to which our slowness can more easily approximate a cognition of the divine Some things are thus attributed to particular realities as if they were proper to them even though they are not proper to actual reality however some things are predicated of certain realities in a more practical way according to the ability of the human mind Whenever we do so we cannot but stretch the sense of human words At any rate the Son of God is not a thought neither internal nor expressed by voice (119B-C)
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
bull Preserving sermo would mean preserving the original polysemy because it offers a wider interpretative spectrum Verbum would weaken the metaphors power to produce diverse interpretations and would narrow it down towards one direction only
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept
of sermo
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating
engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
How can we interpret the history of these translations
bull To the modern eye the question of loacutegos can be analysed from three viewpoints at least linguistic theological and conceptual
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Linguistic plane
bull Verbum sweeps away the polysemy of loacutegos forcing the metaphor into a straitjacket
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Theological plane
bull sermo implies a theology of dialogue
bull verbum implies a theology of monologue
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
Conceptual plane
bull Two worlds are built on opposite interpretations of classical culture
bull Opting for sermo is in line with an effort to maintain the totality of the classical world into Christianity
bull Sermo stands for the loacutegos of antiquity insofar as it grasps the idea of multifarious oneness it also stands for the dialogues of the Olympians
- Metaphor figurative language and translation Some Essential Questions
- Introduction new directions and essential questions
- Why is generative grammar no longer useful
- How has newer research redefined the nature and scope of meaning and cognition
- Generative Grammar
- In contrast with GG
- Slide 7
- Meaning is a central aspect
- Slide 9
- How has this new research opened up new research possibilities for understanding figurative language
- Does figurate competence stand outside ordinary language and cognition or does it belong to them as an essential condition of thinking and language use
- Interesting research routes
- Figures are cognitive processes
- How did Nietzschersquos View of Language anticipate some of these new directions in research and thinking about language
- Roots in the past
- How did Vicorsquos View of Language anticipate some of these new research insights into cognition and language
- Juri Lotman
- Slide 18
- How does the new cognitivist approaches help us better understand the limits and the possibilities of translation
- What limits did a descriptivist approach to translation studies place on the theory and practice of translation
- In what sense can we say that a descriptivist approach to translation studies is epistemologically naiumlve
- Slide 22
- J Holmes ldquoThe Name and Nature of Translation studiesrdquo
- TS Epistemologically naiumlve stance
- Do you agree or disagree that new research into figurative speech is as to translation as were in the 20th century newer developments in semantics
- How do concepts like rhetorical field or in a cognitive framework domain frame profile mental spaces and similarity help us understand the limits and possibilities of translation
- Slide 27
- Slide 28
- Contrastive Linguistics could be rethought in cognitive terms
- How do the examples below illustrate the important role of frames in the process of translating concepts from one culture to another
- Partial equivalence
- Another example ldquomangiarerdquo
- Croft and Cruse (2004) ldquoto genuflectrdquo
- Profile and frame in the analysis of ldquountranslatablerdquo words
- Do you agree or disagree that some concepts are not translatable
- How do the hypotheses of Frames and Profiles assist in overcoming the problem of non-translatability
- Can you provide from your own research or case studies similar examples
- Kuki Shuzo the Japanese concept of ldquoikirdquo
- ldquoespritrdquo
- Croft and Cruse the German term ldquoBildungrdquo
- END OF PRESENTATION ONE
- PRESENTATION TWO
- What is the consequence of a mistranslation of one of the most foundational texts and concepts in western philosophy
- How does a new approach to figurative language help us rectify this mistranslation
- Parmenides Perigrave phuumlseos
- Slide 46
- Slide 47
- Slide 48
- Slide 49
- Slide 50
- Slide 51
- Slide 52
- Fragment B8 lines 50-52
- En (Parmenides A Text with Translation edited by Leonardo Taraacuten Princeton Princeton University Press 1965)
- En (Parmenides of Elea A Text and Translation with an Introduction by David Gallop Toronto University of Toronto Press 1984)
- It (Giovanni Casertano Parmenide Il metodo la scienza lrsquoesperienza Guida Napoli 1978)
- It (Pio Albertelli in Hermann Diels I Presocratici edited by Gabriele Giannantoni Bari Laterza 1981)
- It (I Presocratici introduction translation and annotations by Angelo Pasquinelli Torino Einaudi 1958)
- Fr (Le poeacuteme de Parmeacutenide edited by Jean Beaufret Paris Presses Universitaires de France 1984)
- Sp (Parmenides - Zenon - Meliso - Escuela de Elea Fragmentos translation preface and annotations by Joseacute Antonio Miguez Buenos Aires Aguilar 1965)
- Why has the traditional treatment of koacutesmon apateloacuten decided in favour of ldquodeceptive orderrdquo which is a thoroughly dark and pessimistic approach to this side of reality
- What cultural and cognitive frames and profiles led to this ldquodarkrdquo translation of the text
- koacutesmon apateloacuten
- Simplicius
- Pistoacuten loacutegon and amphiacutes aletheacuteies
- Doacutexas broteacuteias
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (1)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (2)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (3)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (4)
- Koacutesmon apateloacutes apaacutete (5)
- What have we gained with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a perfectly legitimate path to knowledge
- What have we lost translationally conceptually culturally and ideological with a translation of koacutesmon apateloacuten as a deceptive order of things
- Slide 75
- Slide 76
- Parmenides identifies two ways to attain knowledge of reality
- Reality is not given
- After Parmenides the two ways become radical alternatives
- To what extent must we lay at Platorsquos feet the responsibility for encouraging the traditional understanding and translation of Parmenidesrsquo view of being
- What did Plato (and with him the western world that absorbed his philosophy) from this devaluation of Parmenides
- Plato
- Johnrsquos Gospel
- Have you ever considered the semantic cultural and ideological consequences of mistranslation
- What is gained by translating logos with verbum What is lost
- What is gained by tranflating logos with sermo What is lost
- To what extent does research into figurative language help us understand the gains and losses
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Italian
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo English (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo Spanish (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo French (2)
- ldquoIn principium erat verbumrdquo German
- But translating loacutegos into verbum raises a few questions
- Some notes on Greek linguistics
- Slide 98
- Latin translation of loacutegos include
- The history of translation and interpretation of Loacutegos has had enormous consequences in the formulation of Christian orthodoxy What are some of these
- Philo of Alexandria
- How does the Polysemy of loacutegos in Johnrsquos Gospel force us to make translation choices with strong implications for Johnrsquos conceptual semantic and cultural world
- How did the history of translation and interpretation of loacutegos create a divide between traditions stamped as orthodox and those labelled heretical
- Origin
- The conceptual shifts may be explained perhaps with an attempt at using the notion of Loacutegos to salvage the philosophical speculations of ancient Greece
- Gregorio of Nazanzio
- Cyprianus
- Novatianus
- Tertullianus Apologeticum
- Goete Faust
- O Messiaen Traiteacute de musique de couleurs et drsquoornithologie
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (a)
- Tertullianus Adversus Praxean (b)
- Tertullianus
- Lattanzio Divinae institutiones
- In what way did Augustine close down the debate about the translation of loacutegos
- What cultural ideological and semantic frames and profiles might have guided Augustine translational choice
- Augustine verbum replaces sermo
- Why
- Slide 120
- Per speculum in aenigmate
- Slide 122
- What conditions existed in the 16th century that probably made it impossible to return to an understanding of Logos as sermo
- Erasmus (Johnrsquos prologue)
- Novum Testamentum 335 A-B
- (Novum Testamentum 335 A-B)
- A possible objection to Erasmus
- Erasmusrsquo reply
- Slide 129
- Slide 130
- What resources do your working languages contain to translate loacutegos along the lines of the Latin concept of sermo
- Would such a dynamic and figurate treatment of loacutegos be helpful in creating engagement and readability in the cultures and language you are working
- How can we interpret the history of these translations
- Linguistic plane
- Theological plane
- Conceptual plane
-
