Philosophy and Linguistic Authority

C. Rowe
{"title":"Philosophy and Linguistic Authority","authors":"C. Rowe","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198810803.003.0008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter focuses on two particular aspects of the back history of Liddell and Scott (LSJ). First, Plato is, for LSJ, still one of the most important writers of ‘the best’ Attic prose, as he was, for its predecessors, of ‘correct’ Attic; he tends to be one of the benchmarks for Attic usage. But secondly, at the same time LSJ typically treats Plato as belonging to a breed apart: that of the Philosopher, with his own technical or semi-technical vocabulary, his own special ‘philosophical’ ways of thinking, as if these were quite separate from those of non-’philosophical’ authors. The chief purpose of the chapter is to illustrate some of the difficulties attaching to these two approaches, both of which are rooted firmly in earlier editions, stretching back even to the first in 1843.","PeriodicalId":145473,"journal":{"name":"Liddell and Scott","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Liddell and Scott","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198810803.003.0008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This chapter focuses on two particular aspects of the back history of Liddell and Scott (LSJ). First, Plato is, for LSJ, still one of the most important writers of ‘the best’ Attic prose, as he was, for its predecessors, of ‘correct’ Attic; he tends to be one of the benchmarks for Attic usage. But secondly, at the same time LSJ typically treats Plato as belonging to a breed apart: that of the Philosopher, with his own technical or semi-technical vocabulary, his own special ‘philosophical’ ways of thinking, as if these were quite separate from those of non-’philosophical’ authors. The chief purpose of the chapter is to illustrate some of the difficulties attaching to these two approaches, both of which are rooted firmly in earlier editions, stretching back even to the first in 1843.
哲学与语言权威
本章着重于里德尔和斯科特(LSJ)背后历史的两个特殊方面。首先,对于《阿提卡》来说,柏拉图仍然是“最好的”阿提卡散文的最重要的作家之一,就像他对于阿提卡的前辈来说,是“正确的”阿提卡一样;他倾向于成为Attic使用的基准之一。其次,与此同时,LSJ典型地将柏拉图视为另一种人:哲学家,他有自己的专业或半专业词汇,他自己特殊的“哲学”思维方式,好像这些与非“哲学”作者完全不同。本章的主要目的是说明这两种方法所附带的一些困难,这两种方法都深深植根于早期的版本,甚至可以追溯到1843年的第一版。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信