Translation Of Aristotle Research Articles

The intellectual and social world of Martius Valerius

Abstract The bucolic poems of Martius Valerius, first published in 1946, used to be dated to the twelfth century, but thanks to the work of François Dolbeau and Justin Stover, they are now securely dated to the sixth. In this article, I demonstrate that Martius’ fourth eclogue draws extensively on two of the logical works of Boethius, the introduction to the second edition of the commentary on Porphyry's Isagoge and the translation of Aristotle's Peri hermeneias, both from the mid 510s. These works were well known in the twelfth century, but I corroborate the sixth-century dating first by connecting Martius Valerius with Martius Novatus Renatus, editor of a corpus of Boethius’ logical monographs in the 520s, and secondly by arguing that Martius Valerius belonged to a circle of students in Rome who attached themselves to leading senators, including Boethius. I end by considering Martius’ career as quaestor and consul.

How to Be an Unsuccessful Ancient Philosophy Scholar in Uneasy Times: The Case of S. Lisiecki (1872-1960)

The paper provides a brief outline of the biography and works of Stanisław Lisiecki (1872–1960), a little-known Polish classics scholar, who is remembered only, if at all, as a translator of Plato’s Republic. In his early fifties, having given up his career as a Catholic priest, he started working in the field of classics and managed to publish several minor works on Plato in Polish and Latin. His decision to abandon the clergy was not welcomed by many members of the Polish academia and most of his translations of Plato and Aristotle remained unpublished. His renderings of Plato could not compete with the highly accessible translations made by W. Witwicki, which were becoming increasingly popular at that time. Furthermore, Lisiecki’s translations of Aristotle, despite the pioneering nature of his undertaking, met with strong criticism at various university seminars.

Post-Aristotelianism and the Specters of Monolingualism

ABSTRACT Various efforts to desediment the universality of Aristotelian thought suggest that we are in the “time” of post-Aristotelianism. Yet, is it possible to be post-Aristotelian if the reception, and even the subsequent critique, of Aristotelianism has been based not on Aristotle per se but on translations of Aristotle? The imperative, as we argue, is to not look beyond Aristotle but to approach Aristotle as a monolingualized specter—a presumed foundational presence not based in actuality. Adopting this perspective, we compare extant translations of Aristotle’s Politics and Rhetoric in order to foreground the hermeneutic precarity upon which post-Aristotelianism is premised. This essay thus offers not an endorsement or even a critique of post-Aristotelianism but aims to unsettle “Aristotle” as a cohesive figure or body of work to which we respond, the agreed-upon grounds of canonization or rejection. In this way, we highlight the field of rhetoric’s contingency on translational realities.

Thinking about Animals in Thirteenth-Century Paris: Theologians on the Boundary between Humans and Animals

Thinking about Animals in Thirteenth-Century Paris: Theologians on the Boundary between Humans and Animals

Thinking about Animals in Thirteenth-Century Paris: Theologians on the Boundary between Humans and Animals

Thinking about Animals in Thirteenth-Century Paris: Theologians on the Boundary between Humans and Animals

La importancia de los tratados psicológicos aristotélicos para los estudios retóricos

This note reviews the new translation of Aristotle’s De Anima and Parva Naturalia by Fred D. Miller Jr. Against its backdrop, the importance of these psychological treatises for interdisciplinary, rhetorical research is also analyzed, with special emphasis on both Aristotelian criticism and the arts of memory from Antiquity to the early modern period.

Wonder Woman: An Assemblage of Complete Virtue Packed in a Tight Swimsuit

This paper uses actor-network theory (ANT) and Aristotelian virtue ethics to think with/of Wonder Woman as an assemblage of human and non-human actors clustered on a page. It also considers how the emerging assemblage that is Wonder Woman might be viewed as the embodiment of Aristotle’s ‘complete virtue’ or justice. As one of the ‘trinity’ of superheroes of Detective Comics (DC), which also include Superman and Batman, Wonder Woman was created to counter the sadism and tyranny of the Nazi threat during the 1930s and 1940s and has been continually published since 1941. Wonder Woman is a multidimensional icon and an exemplary model of a superhero with a different body and voice, who operates in a different way in the world. She is presented here as a case study to trace possible translations of Aristotle’s configurations of virtue and justice. Using ANT, we argue that Wonder Woman arises from an assemblage of actors that include an armoured swimsuit, a magic lasso, shiny bracelets and a star-emblazoned tiara. By problematising these technologies as actors that commonly invite objectification (the swimsuit) or subjugation (the ropes), this paper suggests possible divergent readings that reveal how virtue and justice can emerge within these relational networks. We test how the sexualised body depictions and overt bondage references in the Wonder Woman comics, and in particular, in our chosen story, George Pérez’s Wonder Woman: Destiny Calling, offer something bolder and more profound—a complex performance of justice. Additionally, this paper intimates the productive methodological powers of ANT in relation to the broader field of comics studies.

The Taming of the Shrew and Anger

Frances Dolan has demonstrated that few Shakespeare comedies stage both the occurrence and intensity of physical violence to the degree that The Taming of the Shrew does. Analysis of this violence has usually focused on its effects rather than its source. Almost exclusively, anger is the cause. Admittedly it is sometimes feigned, as in Petruccio's case. But often it is not pretended but radical, as in the cases of not just Petruccio but Katherina and Grumio as well. The extremity and violence of their anger is remarkable, begging explanation. Anger is a complex phenomenon in The Shrew. In fact, Shakespeare, drawing upon Aristotle, Galen, Seneca, Bacon, and others, offers in this early comedy a veritable taxonomy of the affect. In particular, the English translation of Aristotle's Greek word for anger's mean adopted by several editors of the Nicomachean Ethics is also Shakespeare's word for anger's tempering in The Shrew. Nevertheless, the playwright ultimately begs the question of whether Katherina's and Petruccio's irascible behavior is finally or only temporarily resolved. Providing an answer proves important for whether the theater audience this couple can attain relative peace in their marriage.

La deuda de un traductor: <em>La poética de Aristóteles</em> de Alonso Ordóñez (1624-1626)

En 1626 vio la luz la primera traducción castellana impresa de la Poética de Aristóteles. Este artículo muestra que su autor, Alonso Ordóñez, no se valió del original griego, sino de las traducciones latinas e italianas publicadas en el siglo XVI por Alessandro Pazzi, Bernardo Segni, Lodovico Castelvetro y Alessandro Piccolomini. El análisis de la obra de Ordóñez y de una versión previa de esta preservada en el manuscrito 2624 de la Biblioteca Nacional de Madrid permite esbozar el método subyacente a una traducción que, perdiendo de vista el original, se nos aparece como un mosaico de trabajos previos.

Hermeneutics of translation and understanding of violence

The philosophical definition of violence today is ?incomplete? and leaves a ?gap? between the phenomenon and the concept. This is due to the fact that the concept of ?violence? was/is strangely included in the general philosophical categorial line. In domestic and Western discourse, the problem field of violence contains, above all, political and ethical meanings. The problem is intuitively resolved in its appeal to the concept of ?power?, which turns out to be philosophically lost in modern philosophy. Only exceptionally do we find ?traces? of this concept in philosophical works. Among them are the works of Aristotle, which need to be freed from modern, distorting interpretations. Thus, in the translations of Aristotle, the Greek ???????, used for the traditional transferring the category of possibility, lost its meaning of force (movement, ability, function); in its turn, ?force? lost relation to ?violence? (???) and ?necessity?. Violence is understood as a kind of necessity, which is associated with the suppression of one?s ?own decision?, freedom, something that ?prevents desire? and contrary to ?common thinking,? as well as the absence of ?good?. Violence is presented not only in an ontological sense, but also existentially, as the opposite of ?good? and of one?s own ?desire?. Force remains in the shadow of ?necessity? as ?possibility?, ?potential energy? and ?movement?, and violence loses the opposition that has arisen in an ontological mode.

Tecnologías del aprendizaje y el conocimiento (TAC) para la traducción de Aristóteles Metafísica 980a-982a

Este artículo presenta los resultados de la integración de tac para la lectura, la interpretación y la traducción de Aristóteles en la asignatura de Griego ii impartida en la Universidad de La Sabana. En la primera parte del artículo se explican la motivación, la justificación, los presupuestos teóricos y la metodología seguidos para la inclusión de tac en el aula de griego, que incluyen la reflexión del docente y la opinión de los estudiantes sobre las clases, así como los resultados de las evaluaciones de semestres anteriores, cuyo fin era determinar un nuevo enfoque didáctico. La segunda parte describe las tac usadas según las necesidades propias de la enseñanza y el aprendizaje de la traducción de textos: 1) afianzamiento del vocabulario y de las estructuras gramaticales; 2) presentación, interpretación y traducción del texto origen; 3) autoevaluación, coevaluación y evaluación del texto meta. La última parte está dedicada a la presentación de los resultados de la incorporación de las tac, entre las que destacan la mejora en la motivación de los estudiantes y la posibilidad de su implementación en otros cursos de lengua, pues se favorecen la preparación, el seguimiento, la evaluación y la documentación del proceso de traducción.

The concept of violence in the philosophy of Aristotle

The idea that the concept of 'violence' was part and is still viewed as part of a broad philosophical category may seem strange. However, the problem is resolved by referring to the concept of 'force,' which is lost in modern philosophy. The exception was the works in which we find some “traces” of this concept, including the works of Aristotle, which need to be free from modernizing interpretations. Still, in the translations of Aristotle, the Greek word δύναμις, used in its traditional meaning of potentiality, lost its connotations of force (movement, capability, function); in turn, 'force' was no longer linked with 'violence' (βια) and 'necessity.' Violence is seen as a kind of necessity, which is associated with the suppression of 'will,' freedom, something 'frustrating desire' and contrary to 'common sense,' as well as the absence of 'good.' Violence is presented not only in an ontological sense, but also existentially, as the opposite of 'good' and one's own 'desire.' Force stays in the background of 'necessity' as 'potentiality', 'potential energy' and 'movement', and violence loses the opposition that has arisen in the ontological mode.

Interpretation of signs in the conception of Ch.S. Pierce via predicabilia and categories of Aristotle

The article is devoted to the hypothesis explaining the order of signs' classes presented in the manuscripts and articles of Ch.S.Pierce via the diagram of relations of Aristotle's categories which was described in the first translation of Aristotle into Latin conducted after Boethius by Julius Pacius.The hypothesis allows explaining not only the order of categories in the Ch.S.Pierces diagram but also interpreting them via ten categories of Aristotle on the background of scholastic tradition of depicting relations.The conclusion is drawn that the theory of Ch.S.Pierce seems to be the development of Aristotle's doctrine of categories.The article can contribute to the history of philosophy.

Introduction: Translation and Reception of Fourteenth- and Fifteenth-Century French Literature

IntroductionTranslation and Reception of Fourteenth- and Fifteenth-Century French Literature Marta Marfany The articles published in this volume emerge from a day of seminars entitled "Traduction et réception: La littérature française des xive et xve siècles" that took place at the Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, in July 2016. This special issue focuses on French language, literature, and translation, and explores the translation and reception of fourteenth- and fifteenth-century French texts, especially in the Crown of Aragon and within Catalan culture. The following essays also look across Europe at the translation and reception of texts in other languages during this period; it looks at translations from French, adaptations, and influences. We believe that the following articles will be of interest to the readership of Digital Philology given their comparative and interdisciplinary perspective, combining medieval French literature with related fields such as medieval Catalan literature, medieval Italian literature, and medieval translations. We take a broad view of literature, exploring historical works (Livy and his translator into French, Pierre Bersuire); manuals of chivalry (such as that of the great philosopher Ramon Llull); a popular fourteenth-century allegorical work (the Pèlerinage de la vie humaine by a French Cistercian monk); as well as the great texts of medieval French literature, for example, the poems of Guillaume de Machaut, the works of Alain Chartier (compared with those of Dante), the Roman de la Rose, and Paris et Vienne. We also analyze political and philosophical texts and include reflections on language and translation as seen in the works of Nicolas Oresme and Jean Juvénal des Ursins. Under the overall heading of French literature and with the aid of some representative examples, the range of topics covered in this special issue provides a broad view of translation during the fourteenth and [End Page 135] fifteenth centuries. Considered as a way of transferring doctrinal content from one cultural context to another, translation played a central role in the dissemination of knowledge and the appropriation of scholarly and learned discourse by Romance vernacular languages. Translations from Latin therefore were key in the culture of the Late Middle Ages, as they provided access to classical and scholastic works to an educated audience possessing insufficient or no knowledge of Latin. Translations, therefore, lie at the roots of the literary innovations of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. In the Late Middle Ages, in addition to the usual legal, biblical, and generally religious texts, there were translations of historical, philosophical, and doctrinal texts, largely classical Latin texts and medieval texts on classical subjects. In broad terms, the increase in types of texts translated caused translation to become a discipline in its own right and to develop its own tradition, its own approaches and certain theoretical elements that generated a range of different ideas and practices. Translation prologues are an example of this, as they provided translators with an opportunity to reflect on the difficulty of translating Latin into the Romance languages, to consider the linguistic toils of translation, and to comment on the noble and arduous task of transferring content from a higher culture to a lower one. All these issues appear in the first of the three sections of articles in our collection, which deals with general reflections on translation and reception in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, especially around concepts of translatio imperii and translatio studii. These reflections are exemplified in the work of two great French figures of the period: the polymath Nicolas Oresme, one of the best known official translators for Charles V of France, and the politician Jean Juvénal des Ursins, who was writing in the early fifteenth century. The first article, entitled "Nicole Oresme's Cultural Translatio in Question," is by Anne-Hélène Miller. Although Oresme's translation of Aristotle is among his most celebrated works, it only represents a part of his overall written production. Miller suggests viewing these official works of translation within the context of Oresme's philosophical thought and literary culture. This enables a study of the cultural inheritance (studii) of his works in the light of the political inheritance (imperii). In the second article of the first section of...

Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics

A new English translation of Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics. This ongoing project aims to translate accurately the meaning of Aristotle's terse Greek into readable American English for students and the general reader.

The Source of 16th Century Chinese Translation of Aristotle’s Categories: 名理探 and Neoplatonic Exegetic Tradition

The Source of 16th Century Chinese Translation of Aristotle’s Categories: 名理探 and Neoplatonic Exegetic Tradition

Acercamiento a las tres traducciones castellanas del siglo xv de la Ética nicomaquea de Aristóteles

El objetivo de este artículo es presentar las tres traducciones castellanas del siglo XV de la Ética nicomaquea de Aristóteles. Mediante la contraposición de tres fragmentos significativos de cada una de ellas, contrastaremos tres aspectos de sus diferentes soluciones traductológicas, a saber: la fidelidad a los antropónimos griegos, la precisión en la vulgarización de los conceptos filosóficos y la claridad en la exposición de la doctrina aristotélica.

No untranslatables! (Box 5, TO TRANSLATE)

It was through the Italians that translation as a theoretical enterprise was revived in the Renaissance. This was in large part thanks to Leonardo Bruni, erstwhile chancellor of Florence and indefatigable translator of Greek into Latin at a particularly heady moment in the history of humanism: the early fifteenth century, two generations after that other indefatigable humanist (albeit one ignorant of Greek), Petrarch. Indignant over criticism of his translation of Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, Bruni threw himself into De interpretatione recta (On Correct Translation) in the mid-1420s. His anger at a churchman whose critique revealed misunderstanding not only of Greek but also of his own ‘mother tongue,’ Latin, produced a passionate statement about translation’s importance to the modern Western world. Bruni seems to be the first to have used traductio and traducere to mean ‘translation’: words that would come to replace interpretare, vertere, and convertere, as Remigio Sabbadini has noted, and thus words that insist on the act of transporting, and even transformation. Transformation is, in fact, at the heart of Bruni’s meditations: the ‘best translator will turn his whole mind, heart, and will to his author, and in a sense be transformed by him’ (De interpretatione recta). But after

Aristotelianism in the First Century BCE: Xenarchus of Seleucia by Andrea Falcon (review)

Reviewed by: Aristotelianism in the First Century BCE: Xenarchus of Seleucia by Andrea Falcon Robert Mayhew Andrea Falcon. Aristotelianism in the First Century BCE: Xenarchus of Seleucia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. Pp. ix, 227. $95.00. ISBN 978-0-521-87650-6. The past few decades have been an excellent time to be interested in Peripatetic thought after Aristotle, as much work has been devoted to Theophrastus and [End Page 279] other early Peripatetics, as well as to Alexander of Aphrodisias and the other Greek commentators on Aristotle. Falcon’s study of Xenarchus is an important addition to this growing body of work, one that admirably covers territory not treated elsewhere (or not so well). (I should mention that I have not seen M. Isnardi Parente’s Senocrate-Ermodoro: frammenti [Naples, 1982].) The book has three parts 1. Xenarchus: The Man and his Work; 2. Texts, Translations, and Notes; 3. Reception. There is an introduction and a conclusion. In the introduction, Falcon discusses how Xenarchus has been treated by other scholars and in what sense he is a Peripatetic. Falcon writes: “The epithet ‘Peripatetic’ [from some sources] is best explained as an indication of his commitment to a careful study of Aristotle’s works . . . without the overriding goal of fidelity” (1–2). The precise nature of Xenarchus’ Aristotelianism is further discussed in part 1, an essay on the life and thought of Xenarchus and the intellectual context within which he worked (with a focus on the revival of interest in Aristotle in the first century b.c.e.). This is an excellent entry into the study of Xenarchus, who is usually known, if known at all, merely as a Peripatetic who objected to Aristotle’s conviction that celestial bodies were composed of a special fifth element. The heart of the book, however, is part 2, which consists of two unequal sections. The first contains the text with translation of Aristotle, De Caelo 268b17–269b17. In his translation, Falcon has usefully italicized those lines that are the objects of Xenarchus’ criticisms. The second section (Xenarchus: The Testimonies, with no attempt to distinguish testimonia and fragmenta, a prudent decision) is further divided into five parts: Life (one testimony from Strabo); Physics (eleven from Simplicius’ commentary on De Caelo, and one from Julian the Emperor); Psychology (one from Aëtius via Stobaeus, and one from Philoponus); Ethics (one from Alexander of Aphrodisias); and the Timaeus (one from Proclus). For each testimony (T), the Greek (or in one case, Latin (T 15) is presented first, followed by Falcon’s translation, then by an analysis, and finally by notes geared toward lemmata. This would have been more user-friendly, however, had all of the texts been presented on one side with their translations on facing pages, followed by the commentary. Presentation aside, the translations are faithful to the Greek and in readable English, and the analyses and notes are superb, clarifying what is often dense and difficult material. The accuracy of any account of Xenarchus depends in large part on the value of the sources from which the testimonies come. Falcon defends the reliability of Simplicius as a source for Xenarchus (2–4), although he could have expanded the discussion given this source’s importance. Nevertheless, he is careful with the sources (see for example 129–32, on Aëtius) and in general is a cautious scholar, as every editor of fragmentary material must be. A minor example: in in De Caelo 13.22 (T2), Simplicius’ πρὸς τὴν πέμπτην οὐσίαν is usually considered a title (Against the Fifth Substance); but Falcon—lacking sufficient support for such a reading—translates it without italics (defending his interpretation on 66–68). For those new to Xenarchus, I present as an example the core of one of his objections to Aristotle. This is from T6 (Simpl. in De Caelo 24.21): “It is impossible for circular motion to be natural for a simple body, since in the simple bodies, which are uniform, all the parts have an equal speed, whereas in a circle [the parts] near the center are always slower than those near the periphery, since they move a shorter distance in the same [time period]” (90). [End Page 280] Given...

The Earliest Syriac Translation of Aristotle’s Categories: Text, Translation, and Commentary. Translated by Daniel King.

The Earliest Syriac Translation of Aristotle’s Categories: Text, Translation, and Commentary. Translated by Daniel King.