Made available in DSpace on 2015-05-14T16:53:06Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 2014-04-30Bitstream added on 2015-05-14T16:59:25Z : No. of bitstreams: 1 000822831.pdf: 1439296 bytes, checksum: dedde1e032820dddd90aaf8a5313d447 (MD5) / Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP) / Este trabalho analisa as Odes e elegias, livro de poemas de Carlos Magalhães de Azeredo (1872-1963), publicado em 1904, focando em sua tentativa de transposição dos metros clássicos gregos e latinos para a língua portuguesa. Magalhães de Azeredo foi o mais jovem fundador da Academia Brasileira de Letras, e procurou imitar, em seu livro, os versos das Odi barbare, do italiano Giosuè Carducci (1835-1907). Carducci chamava a seus versos metros bárbaros, por contraste com os versos clássicos que imitara. Sabe-se que a métrica utilizada por poetas e tratadistas da Antiguidade baseava-se em características fonológicas e prosódicas das línguas latina e grega que não se encontram mais nas línguas românicas. Assim, toda tentativa de transposição desta métrica em português - uma língua românica - é um problema que exige algum artifício poético como solução. O que se entende por metro clássico em cada época e círculo literário define as condições de recepção dos poemas gregos e latinos nos mesmos círculos; influi, por consequência, na elaboração dos sentidos que vão ser atribuídos à estrutura formal dos poemas. A análise de Odes e elegias, portanto, abrange suas condições tanto quanto seus resultados: não apenas qual foi sua proposta métrica, mas por que se propôs, ao que atenderia tais propostas, qual o contexto de suas tentativas de transposição da métrica clássica. Neste sentido este trabalho se propõe a contribuir para um campo de investigação que tem merecido um interesse crescente no Brasil, qual seja os estudos de história da tradução e da recepção dos clássicos, o que tem condicionado também um aumento de interesse na história das estratégias formais em tradução de poesia antiga / This work analyzes Carlos Magalhães de Azeredo‘s 1904 Odes e elegias, focusing on his transposition of classical meters to Portuguese. Magalhães de Azeredo (1872-1963) was the youngest founder of the Academia Brasileira de Letras (Brazilian Academy), and he emulated, in his book, the verses of Giosuè Carducci‘s Odi barbare, made in what Carducci (1835-1907) called barbarian meters, contrasting with the true classical verse. It is widely known that ancient metrics was quantity-based-which is to say that it was grounded on Greek and Latin phonological and prosodical features alien to Romance languages. Therefore, every attempt to transpose its meters to Portuguese demands some poetic device to make it work. What, in time and space, is understood as classical meter defines the conditions of ancient poetry reception in literary circles; it has an influence, so, in the meanings attributed to the poems‘ formal structure. Odes e elegias, then, is to be analyzed in a way that keep in mind conditions as well as results: not only what was the metrical contract, but why was this contract proposed, what demands this contract, and what is its context. In this way, this work aims to add to an interesting and new field of investigation in Brazil: the studies on classics‘ translation and reception. These studies are conditioning a crescent interest on the history of formal strategies to translate ancient poetry

Orientador: Marcos Aurelio Pereira / Dissertação (mestrado) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Instituto de Estudos da Linguagem / Made available in DSpace on 2018-08-25T05:07:13Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Pini_Mariana_M.pdf: 615255 bytes, checksum: 51467bd71b14bb047c5105dea6592413 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2014 / Resumo: A obra Brutus, de Marco Túlio Cícero, conduz uma reflexão sobre a história da eloquência e uma avaliação sobre os grandes nomes da retórica, desde suas origens dentro da cultura grega antiga até suas contribuições romanas, cuja glória máxima é depositada sobre o próprio autor. No ocaso da República sob a tirania de César, o Arpinate apresenta seu panteão de oradores, associado a um conjunto de preceitos sobre o latim. Este trabalho advoga que a preceptiva ciceroniana dialoga com a obra De analogia, de César (por sua vez, dedicada a Cícero como resposta a seu influente De oratore). O estudo se dedica a investigar como Cícero formula suas concepções sobre o bom latim de forma incompatível, em numerosos aspectos, com as concepções de César. A discussão sobre a Latinitas é tomada como oportunidade, no Brutus, para que Cícero articule seu próprio ethos como um personagem, bem como o de César, também presente no diálogo. O latim é um campo de batalha que se tinge de tonalidades políticas: o orador concebe a Latinitas como questão de educação elementar e hábito alcançado através da prática com boas famílias. Júlio César, por sua vez, tinha por objetivo democratizar a Latinitas. Assim, a defesa do general, em favor de uma forma restrita de oratória, é regida pela ratio, isto é, de um método racional. A Latinitas está ligada à ideia de identidade propriamente romana; contudo, o debate sobre a fala adequada envolve inevitavelmente pontos de vista diferentes. O Brutus se inicia com a morte de Hortênsio, mas o eclipse do debate forense público imposto pelo general César representa, para Cícero, a morte da República; dessa forma, o texto compõe uma reflexão sobre a morte não apenas de um orador, mas de numerosos princípios caros ao Arpinate na Roma que se desenhava sob o domínio da censura / Abstract: The work Brutus, by Marcus Tullius Cicero, builds a reflection upon the history of eloquence and an evaluation about the greatest names of Rhetoric, since its emergence within the ancient Greek culture until its Roman contributions, whose most glorious representative is Tully himself. At the end of the Republic, under Caesarian tyranny, the Arpinate displays his pantheon of speakers, associated with a set of precepts about the Latin language and culture. The present study advocates that the Ciceronian perceptive is related to De analogia, a work by Julius Caesar (and dedicated to Cicero, as a reaction to his influential De oratore). This dissertation aims at investigating how Cicero formulates his conceptions about Latin in a way incompatible with Caesar¿s convictions. The discussion about Latinitas is seen as an opportunity, in Brutus, for Cicero to articulate his own ethos as a character, as well as Caesar¿s (also included in the dialogue). Latin is a battlefield tinted with political hues: The Roman orator conceives Latinitas as a matter of basic education and a habit reached through practice with worthy families. Julius Caesar, on the other hand, aims to democratize Latinity. Hence, the general¿s standpoint, favoring a restricted understanding of oratory, is governed by ratio ¿ in other words, by a rational method. Latinitas is connected to the idea of a properly Roman identity; the adequate speech is understood differently according to those different perspectives. The Brutus begins with the death of Hortesius, but the obliteration of public forensic debate (enforced by Caesar) represents, for Cicero, the death of Republic. Therefore, the text composes a reflection on death ¿ not merely the death of a speaker, but also the death of a number of principles cherished by the Arpinate in a Rome which had been recently brought under control by means of censorship / Mestrado / Linguistica / Mestra em Linguística

Nous avons tenté dans ce travail de mettre en évidence le sens et l’utilité des réécritures dans la littérature comparée. Pourquoi et comment les écrivains s’emparent-ils d’une œuvre ou d’un texte en général (un texte sacré par exemple) et les transforment-ils ? Les écrivains francophones (ou imprégnés de culture française) des XXe et XXIe siècles s’inspirent de certains modèles de réécritures présents dans la littérature classique européenne ; ils apportent cependant une richesse supplémentaire aux hypotextes sur plusieurs plans : culturel, philosophique et esthétique. Un parallèle entre les arts du verbe et de l’image est établi, les seconds étant censés jeter un éclairage sur les premiers, aider à mieux saisir comment se réalise le passage d’une œuvre de création à une autre dans la continuité et la rupture. Plusieurs auteurs ― dont Maryse Condé, Assia Djebar, Nedim Gürsel et Abdelwahab Meddeb ― usent de la réécriture ― qui peut être interprétation ou travail esthétique sur l’écriture même (pastiche, parodie, etc.) ― pour exprimer leurs pensées et faire passer plus amplement leurs messages. Notre thèse se propose de dévoiler ces pensées et ces messages et d’essayer de les interpréter en faisant ressortir les mobiles ou les motifs des écrivains. Les œuvres sont à la fois des signaux (c’est-à-dire le sens voulu par les auteurs, ce qu’ils souhaitent consciemment exprimer, leur projet intentionnel) et des symptômes (ce que les œuvres révèlent en plus au lecteur). / In this work, we have attempted to highlight the meaning and usefulness of rewriting in comparative literature, whether this literature is European or is derived from French-speaking countries in other parts of the world. Why and how do writers seize a work or text in general (sacred text, for example) and transform it ? We recall that the French-speaking (or inhabited by French) writers of the 20th and 21st centuries are inspired by models of rewriting present in classical literature; they nevertheless bring hypotexts to a great wealth on several levels: cultural, philosophical and aesthetic. A parallel between the arts of the verb and the image is established, the latter being supposed to shed light on the first, to help better grasp the passage from one work of creation to another in continuity and rupture. Several authors - including Maryse Condé, Assia Djebar, Nedim Gürsel and Abdelwahab Meddeb - use rewriting - which can be interpretation or aesthetic work on writing itself (pastiche, parody) - to express their thoughts and pass messages that matter to them. It is these thoughts and messages that our thesis proposes to unveil and try to understand by bringing out the motives of writers.

By combining literary criticism, philology, and contemporary psychoanalysis, this dissertation offers an innovative interpretation of Neronian court literature (Seneca, Lucan, and Petronius). I argue that the works of these three authors thematize and embody a problematic relation between the human subject and language. Language is not conceived or represented as an inert tool that can be easily appropriated by the speaking subject, but rather as a powerful entity that may, and often does, take control of the human subject, directing it from without. Besides analyzing how Seneca, Lucan, and Petronius portray the relation between the human subject and language in the internal plots and characters of their works, I also explore the relation between these three authors themselves and language. My conclusion is that this relation is defined by unresolved ambiguities and neurotic tensions, and I suggest that this might be a consequence of the traumatizing circumstances that the three examined authors endured at Nero’s court.

For thousands of years, people have been hearing, reading, and interpreting stories and myths in light of their own experience. To read a work by a different author living in a different era and setting, people tend to imagine works of literature to be something they are not. To avoid this fateful tendency, I hope to elucidate what it means to read a work of literature and interpret it: love it to the point of wanting to foremost discuss its excellence of being a piece of art. Rather than this being a defense, I would rather call it a musing, an examination on two texts that I adore: Beowulf and the Anglo-Saxon Exodus

In 1530, a German physician named Otto Brunfels published an herbal entitled Herbarum Vivae Eicones (Living Images of Herbs). In it, he planned to map the names of medicinal herbs known in and native to Germany onto their Greek and Latin names. Brunfels’ audience included fellow physicians and in order to assist with the identification of the herbs in his book, his publisher employed a woodcut artist to produce realistic images of them, a novelty in the genre of printed herbals. Over time, Brunfels’ work was superseded by 16th-century botanists and his legacy was relegated to the illustrations of his herbs, while his contributions to the naming and description of them were dismissed as unoriginal. However, a closer examination reveals Brunfels’ herbal as a transitional text bridging the gap between the herbal tradition and the development of the science of botany. In addition to citing Pliny the Elder as his primary authoritative influence, Brunfels also references a number of 15th-century Italian humanist scholars who were neither botanists nor physicians, but who were known for their critiques of the early printed editions of Pliny’s Historia Naturalis and even of Pliny himself as a natural history authority. Thus, Brunfels’ herbal is tied to the manuscript and printing history of Pliny and to humanist attempts to correct and stabilize his text. Moreover, in the course of his work, Brunfels encountered a number of herbs that were known to him, but whose Latin and Greek nomenclature he could not accurately identify. As a result, he was forced to describe in his own words, in original Latin, these herbae nudae with German nomenclature but with unknown Greek and Latin names. In addition, Brunfels encounters considerable disagreement among the ancient authorities about the naming and classification of other herbs and he is again forced to insert his own opinion, which he calls iudicium nostrum. I argue that Brunfels’ original Latin is a very early example of what would eventually become formal botanical Latin. Brunfels’ herbal is situated in such a way that it looks backward whilst simultaneously looking forward. It is an object of reception, appropriating terminology and methods from Pliny the Elder and from the humanist scholars who debated the quality of the printed editions of his work and the accuracy of the information provided in it. It is simultaneously the subject of reception, demonstrating a halting, hesitant vocabulary and style of Latinity that would eventually come to be identified with botany as a discipline. Chapter 1 addresses Pliny’s ideas of what constitutes knowledge (cognitio) about plants in the Historia Naturalis, via his arguments against improper nomenclature (nomina nuda) and the alignment of herbal medicine with magic (magicae herbae). Pliny’s advocacy for proper methodology (experience over book learning) is also examined. Chapter 2 turns to the manuscript tradition of Pliny’s text and the first two printed editions, in 1469 and 1470, which were corrupt and resulted in an unstable, inaccurate text. In Chapter 3, the reactions of the Italian humanists to these early printed editions are considered, along with the transition from critiques of the editors and printers to debates about inaccuracies that can be traced to Pliny himself. Chapter 4 turns to Otto Brunfels and traces his reliance on Pliny as well as on the Italian humanists, especially Ermolao Barbaro, who claimed to “heal” the errors in Pliny and stabilized his text. Brunfels’ original descriptions of herbs are also discussed. In the conclusion, Brunfels’ work is compared with that of botanists who postdated him, including Leonhard Fuchs, Kaspar Bauhin, and Karl Linnaeus.

<p>This paper is concerned with the use of mutiny narratives in historical texts as a microcosm of the historians’ goal of the work as a whole. This study is built upon the recent trend in scholarship, where a particular feature of a text has been studied to provide an analysis on the author or the underlying purpose of his work. Mutinies and, more specifically, mutiny narrative patterns have not been studied to a great extent for this type of analysis. However, based upon their tradition delineation and explanation of events and their ubiquitous speeches, mutiny narratives are capable of providing a new avenue for this type of analysis. The first chapter will look at the mutiny of Scipio Africanus’ troops at Sucro in 206 B.C.E. as presented by the historians Polybius and Livy. Both attempted to organize their works upon particular moral and didactic lines, the results of which are clearly expressed in their construct of the mutiny. This intentional framework is also present in the poet Lucan’s historical epic the <em>Bellum Civile</em>, who shaped the mutiny of Caesar’s troops in 47 B.C.E. in order to express his own belief in the inherent cataclysm and paradox of civil war. Finally these same themes of chaos and contradiction are also present in my third chapter and its analysis of five mutinies found in Tacitus, two in 14 C.E. and three in 69 C.E. under Galba, Otho and Vocula. Tacitus deliberately engineered the earlier mutinies in order to create both thematic and linguistic echoes to the later seditions in order to prove that the same problems that caused the later civil war were present under the earliest emperors.</p> / Master of Arts (MA)

<p>This thesis has two primary aims: 1) to add weight to the minority opinion that Xenophon is not naively pro-Spartan and that while he appreciates and admires certain facets of the Spartan socio-political system, he recognises and criticises its inherent flaws, and 2) to show that Xenophon is consistent and even-handed in his treatment of Spartans throughout his works with no significant alteration over the period of his literary output. The focus is on those works in which Spartans figure most prominently: the Anabasis, Hellenica, and Respublica Lacedaemoniorum; the Agesilaus and Cyropaedia are dealt with insofar as they complement and illuminate matters under discussion.</p> <p>The first two chapters show that very little is known with certainty about Xenophon's life and the chronology of the relevant works. I argue that this lack of factual evidence has opened the way for scholars to make inaccurate and misleading speculations in support of the traditional view that Xenophon is uncritically pro-Spartan. In the next two chapters various Spartan leaders in the Anabasis and Hellenica are examined with respect to the qualities which Xenophon believed a good leader should possess. It is concluded that Xenophon shows no obvious bias toward Spartans in either work; praise and criticism are apportioned as due. The fifth chapter considers the Respublica Lacedaemoniorum with emphasis on those aspects of the Spartan lifestyle which bear most directly on the way Spartan leaders function. The standard view of the work as encomiastic is challenged and its purpose is reassessed. I argue that Xenophon simply presents an analysis of those Spartan laws and institutions which he believed allowed Sparta to rise to pre-eminence in the Greek world. A comparison with what he says elsewhere shows that he did not necessarily consider these laws to be ideal or worthy of imitation. A short conclusion draws attention to the consistency in Xenophon's attitude to Sparta in the works considered.</p> / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

In this study, I challenge previous assumptions on Thucydides’ silence on gender in the History in order to understand this erasure as a central component of the historian’s attempt at asserting authorial control over a narrative of crisis. My project investigates the gendered strategies employed by Attic tragedy and historiography to represent defiant speakers – characters who challenge traditional speech, like Antigone or the Corcyreans, or those who speak ambiguously, like Cassandra and Alcibiades – in the context of 5th century Athens. Rather than offering a historical reconstruction of the relationship between Thucydidean historiography and drama, my project presents a theoretical reorientation of how the two genres can and should be read in parallel. Methodologically, I integrate close readings with the insights afforded by Anne Carson’s creative engagements with antiquity in order to analyze how gender structures the meaning-making systems in these narratives. Following a chronotropic trajectory, this dissertation investigates how gender refracts through the ways in which the tragedians and Thucydides represent issues of time, space and place, and perception; it then ends by returning to time to offer a critical re-evaluation of the receptions and afterlives of Greek tragedy and history. Ultimately, this study offers a methodology that helps us model a parallel reading of Attic tragedy and Thucydidean historiography; not in order to “test out” the historicity of tragedy against Thucydides’ account, but rather to use tragedy to fill the gap of gender in the History. Probing this dialogue – a dialogue informed as much by silence and omission as by contact and shared vocabulary – among ancient and modern, tragic and historiographic, originary and receptive models of literary entanglement challenges us to rethink the political potential of transgressive speakers within canonical narratives, and to reflect on the role that gender has in shaping these discursive tensions.

This dissertation of limited scope, part of a Course-work Master’s in Ancient Languages and Cultures, consists of five chapters which deal with issues relating to the perception and literary treatment of non-human animals in African and Classical traditional stories involving animal characters. The focus of the research was placed upon arguing that: human characteristics were attributed to animal creatures in the myths/traditional stories from both cultures; both cultures made attempts to explain how certain animals became domesticated and how others remained wild; mythical thinking is not a preserve of one culture, it is rather part of human nature; mythical monsters are present in both cultures and that they have always to be destroyed by man, though not easily; myths served several functions for both cultures, ranging from educational entertainment to socializing purposes, to making attempts to explain ancient man’s environment and its happenings. The study was undertaken in the hope of enabling certain recommendations to be formulated, on the basis of the findings, to effect a better and more informed strategy for teaching Classical Mythology and Classics, in general, in the Mawian/African context. / Classics & World Languages / M. A. (Specialisation in Ancient languages and culture)