Dionysius the Areopagite

2019 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Dimitrios Pallis
Keyword(s):  
Dionysius The Areopagite

Three Ways to Imitate Paul in Late Antiquity: Ekstasis, Ekphrasis, Epektasis

2021 ◽  
Vol 114 (1) ◽  
pp. 96-117
Author(s):  
Michael Motia
Keyword(s):  
Late Antiquity ◽  
Meaning Making ◽  
Gregory Of Nyssa ◽  
Dionysius The Areopagite ◽  
John Chrysostom ◽  
Heaven And Earth ◽  
Pseudo Dionysius ◽  
Scholarly Attention

AbstractRobert Orsi’s argument that religion, more than a system of “meaning making,” is a “network of relationships between heaven and earth” helps us understand what is at stake in imitation for early Christians. The question for Orsi is not, “What does it mean to imitate Paul?” as much as it is, “In what kind of relationship is one engaged when one imitates Paul?” Christians argue over both what to imitate (Who is Paul?) and how to imitate (How should Christians relate to Paul in order to be like him or to render him present?). The what has received lots of scholarly attention; this paper focuses on the how. I compare the range of possibilities of how to imitate Paul by focusing on three influential accounts of mimesis: Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite (ekstasis), John Chrysostom (ekphrasis), and Gregory of Nyssa (epektasis).

Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite

2011 ◽  
pp. 1087-1089
Author(s):  
Simo Knuuttila ◽  
David Piché ◽  
Pieter De Leemans ◽  
Stephen F. Brown ◽  
Fabrizio Amerini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Dionysius The Areopagite ◽  
Pseudo Dionysius

scholarly journals Newly Found Greek Sources of Slavic Translated Stichera

Slovene ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 368-404
Author(s):  
Mariya Puzina
Keyword(s):  
John The Baptist ◽  
Dionysius The Areopagite

This article features previously unpublished Greek originals to the Slavic translated stichera in the manuscripts оf Menaion Sticherarion of the XII century. These texts were found during the study of the manuscripts of Sinai, Athos, Messina, Patmos, the Grottaferrata monastery, as well as of the codices from the libraries of Vatican, Paris, Moscow and St. Petersburg. This article contains 31 stichera on the Nativity of Mary (08.09), Nativity of Christ (25.12), Week after Christmas, on the Epiphany (05, 06.01), the Dormition of the Virgin (15.08), to Saints Dionysius the Areopagite (03.10), to Joannicius the Great (04.11), ap. Matthew (16.11), Eustratius, Auxentius, Eugene, Mardarius and Orestes (13.12), Elias, Probus and Ares (19.12), Anastasia the Pharmakolytria (22.12), ap. Timon (30.12), prop. Jeremiah (01.05), Athanasius the Great (02.05), Leontius (18.06), John the Baptist (24.06, 29.08), Pantaleon (27.07), Machabees (01.08), Florus and Laurus (18.08), Adrian and Natalia (26.08) in Slavic and in Greek, with brief comments.

scholarly journals Current trends in the Russian translation theory: towards a new methodological standard of translation (book review: Mishkurov, E. N. Hermeneutics of Translation (towards theoretical and methodological standard of translation): monograph

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 108-118
Author(s):  
Anna L. Solomonovskaya
Keyword(s):  
Philosophy Of Language ◽  
Geographic Origin ◽  
Translation Theory ◽  
Controversial Issues ◽  
Rhetorical Device ◽  
Current Trends ◽  
Dionysius The Areopagite ◽  
The Status ◽  
Methodological Standard ◽  
Semantic Differentiation

The article reviews different perspectives concerning the status, origin and functions of double translations in European cultural space throughout the period. The term double translation here refers to the translation of one word with two (rarely more) lexemes connected with a conjunction or another linking word. This technique was universal across medieval translation schools, whatever their geographic origin. However, only particular schools or individual translators have been studied in terms of this technique so far, so the author aims to summarize the findings, delineate some controversial issues in the domain under consideration and place the findings in a common perspective. The controversial issues comprise (but are not limited by) the causes of their emergence in translated texts (from almost accidental fixation of the translator’s hesitation to the conscious decision to apply two different methods of translation based on specific philosophy of language). Another widely discussed question is the status of the words in such a pair – whether they were regarded as synonyms or had another status. One more question that causes discussion is their functions in the text, namely whether they were a rhetorical device or a certain means of semantic differentiation. The author of the article supposes that double translation should be considered dynamically and such chronological consideration makes it possible to argue that double translations first appeared to convey the whole range of meanings of a certain word enabling the reader to make their own choice concerning the exact meaning of the word in each particular context. As for the philosophical or theological background of the technique (be it language philosophy of St. Augustine or the theory of images developed by Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite) sometimes assumed to have been intentionally realized by medieval translators, it is hard to verify such claims as the utterances (Prefaces) of the medieval translators themselves hardly mention (with the possible exception of Praefatio Brixiana) either the technique or its presumed theological grounds. Moreover, word pairs (hendyadis) had been used as a rhetorical device both in the literary tradition and the national epic poetry of many European countries. This rhetorical device was widely used for emphasis, so when double translation actually lost its semantic function, it was retained by languages as set phrases or a purely stylistic device.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document