In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:IntroductionCynthia Damo and Sarolta TakácsThe present special issue of the American Journal of Philology is devoted to the Senatus Consultum de Cn. Pisone Patre ( SCPP). 1 It grew up around the APA/AIA Joint Seminar on that subject which was part of the program at the annual meeting in Chicago in 1997. In addition to the three papers presented at that seminar and the formal response to them, (...) this collection contains a critical text of the document, an English translation, photographic plates of the most complete version of the text (Copy A), a bibliography of editions, reviews, and discussions of the document, a new review of the inscription’s initial publication, an essay on a closely related text, and an essay on a literary account of the events that generated the document.The SCPP is a substantial document, running to 176 lines in Copy A, a bronze tablet of approximately 118 3 45 cm. Six or seven copies have been found in Spain alone. The inscription reports the Senate’s decisions in the trial of Cn. Calpurnius Piso and his associates in Rome in the year a.d. 20. A lengthy text on a crucial event from a central period of the Principate will naturally offer information for and reveal problems in our understanding of many areas of Roman history. The SCPP thus joins the Tabula Siarensis to give us a glimpse, unseen before the 1980s, of the Senate’s corporate self-presentation in this period: the Senate addresses in turn the immortal gods, the emperor, members of the imperial family in descending importance, the equestrian ordo, the populace, and the soldiers, positioning itself carefully (and differently) vis-à- vis each. The Senate ensures that the decree will be seen throughout the empire by ordering publication in the most frequented spot of the most populous city of each province and in the winter quarters of every legion (lines 165–72). Furthermore, because the decree responds to events to which Tacitus devoted an important section of his first three Tiberian books, it provides an external (though far from unproblematic) check on Tacitus’ account of the trial and the events that led up to it. [End Page 1]Copies A and B were found in the modern province of Sevilla. Copy A’s provenance seems to point to the ancient Irni. Copy B’s place of origin was initially believed to be ancient Olaurum, but a location in the vicinity of El Tejar has now surfaced as another possibility. Like the remaining fragments (Copies C, D, E, and F, containing only a few letters each), all pieces of A and B came to light during illegal “excavations.” This circumstance will most likely render more precise localization impossible, but all the available information about the various copies points at present to the Roman province of Baetica as their original source. All the pieces are now housed together in the Archaeological Museum of Seville.Copy A begins with the heading “Decree of the Senate Concerning the Elder Cn. Piso, put up for view when N. Vibius Serenus was proconsul” ( senatus consultum de Cn. Pisone patre propositum N. Vibio Sereno procos.). This is inscribed across the top of the tablet’s four columns in letters much larger than those used for the text of the decree (see Plates I–VIII). This heading is not found in Copy B, where the first three lines of the text itself are simply written in letters larger than those of the remaining lines, with the first line displaying letters somewhat larger than the second and third. Copy A’s heading offers us a glimpse at the procedure involved in displaying a decree composed in Rome for an empire-wide audience; it was the governor of the province who initiated the process of public display at the provincial level. Yet the fact that Copy B lacks this heading suggests that the process that resulted in the creation of these two (and presumably other) copies was not entirely uniform.Further discrepancies between the two copies include their physical layout—Copy A consists of four columns with 176 lines of text, Copy B of two columns with 127 lines—and... (shrink)

This essay argues that Humean impressions are triggers of associative processes, which enable us to form stable patterns of thought that co-vary with our experiences of the world. It will thus challenge the importance of the Copy Principle by claiming that it is the regularity with which certain kinds of sensory inputs motivate certain sets of complex ideas that matters for the discrimination of ideas. This reading is conducive to Hume’s account of perception, because it avoids the impoverishment of conceptual (...) resources so typical for empiricist theories of meaning and explains why ideas should be based on impressions, although impressions cannot be known to mirror matters of fact. Dieser Aufsatz argumentiert dafür, dass humesche Eindrücke Auslöser von assoziativen Prozessen sind, welche es uns ermöglichen, stabile Denkmuster zu bilden, die mit unseren Erfahrungen der Welt kovariant sind. Der Aufsatz stellt somit die Wichtigkeit des Kopien-Prinzips in Frage, nämlich dadurch, dass behauptet wird, für die Unterscheidung der Ideen sei die Regelmäßigkeit maßgeblich, mit der gewisse Arten von sensorischen Eingaben gewisse Mengen von komplexen Ideen motivieren. Diese Lesart trägt zu einem Verständnis von Humes Auffassung der Wahrnehmung bei, da sie die Verarmung der begrifflichen Mittel, die für empiristische Theorien der Bedeutung so typisch ist, vermeidet und erklärt, warum Ideen auf Eindrücken basieren sollten, obwohl Eindrücke nicht als Abbildungen von Tatsachen erkannt werden können. (shrink)

Még 2013 májusában került sor arra a Metafora című nyelvészeti és filozófiai workshopra, amelynek a keretein belül elhangzottak a jelen kötetben helyet kapott tanulmányok alapját képező, az Erasmus Kollégium nyelvfilozófiai kutatócsoportjának tagjai által jegyzett előadások. Ezeknek, s így a mostani összeállításnak is kiemelt témája a relevanciaelmélet, amellyel (pontosabban annak metaforafelfogásával) részletesen foglalkozik a bevezető dolgozat, illetve az azt követő három írás. Ezek közül az elsőben Pete Krisztián a teória klasszikus vonulatát állítja párhuzamba az átdolgozott, továbbfejlesztett változatokkal, majd Zvolenszky Zsófia - (...) részben ehhez kapcsolódva - a konvencionális és költői metaforák témáját illetően kritikával illeti a modern megközelítést. Kuti Judit a Sperber-Wilson- és a Harald Weinrich-féle metaforaelméletet hasonlítja össze. A folytatásban olyanok metaforaleméleteivel ismerkedhetünk meg, mint Donald Davidson és Paul Ricoeur; Kálmán László egy hagyományos irányzatból kinövő, mégis új nyelvfelfogást és metaforaelemzést mutat be; Kiss Angelika és Jellinek Sára egy-egy nyelvhasználati jelenséget és metaforikus beszédmódot mutat be (a japán és koreai nyelv, és a humor nyelvfilozófiai vonatkozásai kapcsán); Nemesi Attila László a filmes és mozgóképes trópusokról, s azok csoportosításáról ír; Molnár Cecília Sarolta pedig a mai modern dalszövegek metaforakészletét elemzi. A mutatóval záruló kiadvány nyelvészeti szakgyűjteményekbe javasolható beszerzésre. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:American Journal of Philology 123.3 (2002) v-vi [Access article in PDF] ThesmophoriazousaiPrefaceThe American Journal of Philology began the year 1999 (Volume 120.1) with a special issue, the first in AJP's history, devoted to the Senatus Consultum de Cn. Pisone Patre. The guest editors of this volume were Cynthia Damon and Sarolta Takacs. While it has not been the practice of the Journal to publish special issues, it seems (...) appropriate that we do so from time to time when a particularly interesting set of articles on a major theme presents itself. Such special issues are able to cover an author, work, or subject with more range and depth than one individual paper can, and they often contain layers of complexity and interdisciplinary insights that a single author would find it difficult to contribute.This special issue had its origins in the conference "Performing Aristophanes," held at Case Western Reserve University on February 24, 2001. Designed by the University's Theater Arts Department to complement the production of Mary-Kay Gamel's version of Aristophanes' Thesmophoriazousai, The Julie Thesmo Show, the conference was generously supported by the Baker-Nord Center and by the Susan and Ronald Heller Conferences for the Arts Fund. Two of the articles in this volume, those by Angeliki Tzanetou and Gonda Van Steen, were presented in an earlier version at the conference; others offering presentations were Niall W. Slater, Peter Meineck, John Starks, Jr., and Richard Perloff. Jeffrey Henderson provided incisive comments (which formed the basis for his epilogue in this volume). The other articles included here (Gamel, Scharffenberger, Stehle) were added at a later date.As Henderson points out in his epilogue, the Thesmophoriazousai is the Aristophanic play that has been least explored by scholars. But it has lately received more notice in new translations and a new critical [End Page 5] edition, and the time seems right for a new production of this play with accompanying reflections on its performance history, issues of gender and the body, the limits of a written text, the relationship between tragedy and comedy and between ritual and theatrical representation, and an unpublished, controversial, and relatively unknown translation of this play. Indeed, classicists are now paying more attention to both performance studies/performance criticism and translation as bona fide subdisciplines of classics. It should be noted that this year, for only the second time, the American Philological Association gave the Goodwin Award of Merit to a translation (of several plays of Aristophanes, done for the Loeb Classical Library by Jeffrey Henderson). 1 AJP has in the past year published as Brief Mentions several reviews of contemporary performances of ancient texts.Thus, this special issue marks a new horizon for the American Journal of Philology. I would like to extend my thanks to Mary-Kay Gamel, the guest editor of this volume, for overseeing, editing, coordinating, and encouraging these articles and for her leadership in the fields of performance and performance studies in classics.Barbara K. Gold Editor Note 1. The first award was given in 1977 to Harold Cherniss for his two-part Loeb edition of Plutarch's Moralia, Vol. 13. The award to Henderson was the first time the award was given for a literary translation.... (shrink)